Geotehnika 2019

- +
/

('()
$1$/,:$56$6,=.(02%,/,5$1(,/,*4$1,=1(125,8256,@,3$
',1$0,=.,06(5620 236(4(;(1-$ @,3$
%4:(),.$5$1327:'$1 %(:%('$1 52),56,&,4$1
(#&
2 -# 0#$12$2'.#%.0(&'20 (-
6- ,("$12(-&.%$$/.3-# 2(.-1
523568(1,24,*,1$/1, 56$1'$4' (- ,(:*(2$12 ./2$0$8$-) =(/
#&# !&'# $%&"
+$4'8(4,52)68(4 0.%.3-# (6+(4/$1'5
52)68(4, $3'(-628$1, , #"
5(1:24, .$/,%4,5$1, -#$4". !
)!('%!#&#("

'2.624$ 1$7.$ *4$?(8,1$4568$
0$*,56$41$7.$*4$?(8,1$4568$

0$56(4,1A(1-(4$ *4$?(8,1$4568$
',3/20,4$1,,1A(1-(4 *(2/2*,-(
',3/20,4$1,,1A(1-(4*(2'(:,-(
,1A(1-(4*4$?(8,1$4568$
6(+1,=$4$4$:/,=,6,+342),/$
&( $*#!#&#$'$!
0.%.3-# 5(46,),.$6, 2 ,53,6,8$1-7
/,&(1&( -@$-)$01*$*.,.0$0!()$
&#
,53,6$128,@(2'
@,328$4$:/,=,6,+6,328$ ,',0(1:,-$
,:*4$?(1,+74$:/,=,6,0*(2/2@.,075/28,0$
025628,8,-$'7.6,:*4$'(+26(/,2%$/27684'(8(6423$4.28,
@,328,2%-(.$6$,:'82-(12325/2812.20(4&,-$/1$:*4$'$
.7/$ =8$2%$/27684'(:$342-(.$6
$+&0 #$ 2$0%0.-2
A(/(:1,=.$56$1,&$ $-2 0
$.&0 # 0.*./128$:*4$'$
,! 1 #$$, :*$025628,1$ *.0(#.03(34,56731$
5$2%4$;$-1,&$:$ ,.12- #(025628,1$2%,/$:1,&,2.2
(2*4$'$325/281,.203/(.5 (0/.02(26 3/$621$ 0&3
+ 4() 8(642*(1(4$624,7 4$20./ 0*.4(, +!3- 0(
+(!3- 064*28,15.,.203/(.5 (#+ 1$',325/281256$0%(1,
.203/(.5 $-20 + 0#$- 7(2*4$'7+26(/ .- 7
(2*4$'7+26(/1$3/$1,1,6$1-2%-(.$6 $+2 72%$128&,0$
#*'(($&
(-(12 0124.&0 <$4(- 0124 1 .!0 8 ) ((-%0 123*230$
$/3!+(*$0!()$ .0(#.0(0!()$ 32$4(0!()$ >$+$7-("$
0!()$ $.1.-# -$0&./0.)$*2 $-$7 -@$-)$0(-&
-2$&0 +-@$-)$0(-& '(- *4$'(2*4$' '(- ' -#.-&
-2$0- 2(.- + 0 "$ 3! 3 0 #(- 5(-& -$0&.&0.3/
2 +( - .-12037(.-( 0$611(-$2 (-@$-)$0(-&B

(16$4:$376(8(,*(26(+1,.7
7/ 7/(8$482-82'(,@,;$ (2*4$'4%,-$
6(/

(0$,/ 2)),&(,156,676,0545
999,156,676,0545

0~
ASSOCIATION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS OF SERBIA
II
, (PUBLISHER):
¯āȀAssociation of Civil Engineers of Serbia
ǡǡæͻȀǡȀ ǣȋͲͳͳȌ͵ʹͶͳ656

ȋ PROGRAMME COMMITTEE) :
ȋCo-Chairman):
Ǥ *ǡǡ
ee*ǡǡ
,ȋMembers):
Ǥǡǡ
Ǥǡǡ
Ǥ ǡǡ
Ǥ ,*ǡǡ
Ǥeeǡǡ
Ǥ -ǡǡ
*ǡ ǡ
Ǥ *ǡǡ
Ǥ*ǡǡ
Ǥǡǡ
«
ǡǡ
Ǥ*ǡǡ

Ǥ**ǡǡ
Ǥ**ǡǡ
Ǥ0
ǡǡ
Ǥ,ǡǡ
Ǥ*ǡǡ
Ǥ*ǡæǡ
Ǥǡǡ
Ǥ©ǡǡ
**ǡǡ
ȀȋEditor in ChiefȌǣǤ *

,ȀȋEditorȌǣ0*
Ǥ
āā«ǡǤ
~ȋCirculationȌǣʹͲͲeȋPrinted byȌǣǡ
CIP- Каталогизација у публикацији

Народна библиотека Србијe
624.1(082)
НАУЧНО-стручно међународно саветовање Геотехнички аспекти грађевинарства (8 ; 2019 ; Врњачка
Бања)
Zbornik radova Osmog naučno-stručnog međunarodnog savetovanja Geotehnički aspekti građevinarstva =
Conference Proceedings [of] Eighth International Conference Geotechnics in Civil Engineering, Vrnjačka
Banja, 13. - 15. novembar 2019. / [organizatori] Savez građevinskih inženjera Srbije ... [et al.] ; editor Radomir
Folić. - Beograd : Savez građevinskih inženjera Srbije = Association of Civil Engineers of Serbia, 2019 (Zemun :
Akademska izdanja). - XII, 500 str. : ilustr. ; 24 cm
Radovi na srp. i engl. jeziku. - Tiraž 200. - Str. XI: Predgovor ; Foreword / Radomir Folić, Aleksandar Đukić. -
Bibliografija uz svaki rad. - Abstracts.
ISBN 978-86-88897-13-6
а) Механика тла -- Зборници б) Геотехничке конструкције -- Зборници
COBISS.SR-ID 280751628
Slike na koricama:Čišćenje niskog i visokog rastinja Cleaning of low and high vegetation
Čišćenje oslabljenih blokova stene Cleaning the weakened wall blocks
Pripremljena podloga Prepared construction base
Nanošenje kontaktnog sloja mlaznog betona Application of contact layer sprayed concrete
III

0~

Se
,~
ǤǤ

OeV ,

,-,
0

,

0
EIGTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
GEOTECHNICS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
ǣǤ ©
«ǡͳ͵Ǥ- ͳͷǤʹͲͳͻǤ
IV

ȋCONFERENCE ORGANISERS):
Savez gra¯āǡ
æ«āǡ
ǤǤ
æ«

ȋORGANIZING COMMITTEE):
ǣ0*ǡæ«
ǣ*ǡææ«
ǣ*ǡ–
,ǣæ *ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡ-

*ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡ–
ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡæ–
~*– *ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡ–
*ǡǤāǤǤǡ-
*ǡǤāǤǤǡ–
0*ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡǡ
ǡǤāǤǤǡǡ
~

ȋSPONSORED BY):
ǡ æ Ǥ
ǤǤ
ǤǤǤ
ǤǤǤ
ǤǤ
ǡ,æ
ǡ

ǡ
āǡ
ǡ
ǤǤǤ
ǡ
ǤǤǤ
V
~
CONTENTS

KEYNOTE LECTURES
ͳǤ ǤȋȌ

ǡ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ

ʹǤ ǤȋȌ

0
ʹͲͳ͹- ʹͲͳͻ ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹ͵
͵Ǥ Ǥ «©ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ȋȌ

~,

,- ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵͵
ͶǤ Ǥeæǡ ǤǡǤǡǤ ǡ Ǥ ȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷͻ
ͷǤ ǤȋȌ

~

ǡ

ǡ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͷͻ
ͳǤ
ǣ– ,
0

ǡ

TOPIC 1. GEOTECHNICAL STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS
͸Ǥ Ǥ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ©©ȋȌ
,e͹*
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͹ͻ
͹Ǥ ǤȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͺ͹
ʹǤ
ǣ
0

TOPIC 2. GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE
ͺǤ Ǥ©©ȋȌ

,
0
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͻ͹
ͻǤ ǤǡǤ ©ǡǤ©ȋȌ

,~

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͲ͵
VI
3Ǥ
ǣ
,
0

TOPIC 3. GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF CONSTRUCTION IN URBAN AREAS
ͳͲǤ Ǥ~©ȋȌ

,

- ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͲͻ
ͳͳǤ SǤ *ǡǤ ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ~©ȋȌ

,
0
,
e
ǡͳͳ͹͵ΪͳͶͲǡͲͲ ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͳ͹
4Ǥ
ǣ~ǡǡ

TOPIC 4. SITE INVESTIGATIONS, CHARACTERIZATION OF SOIL AND ROCK
ͳʹǤ Ǥ«©ǡǤ«©ȋ
Ȍ
0 ~
e
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳʹͷ
ͳ͵Ǥ Ǥ©ǡǤ0ȋeȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ͵ͷ
ͳͶǤ Ǥ0©ǡǤ 0©ǡǤ æ© ȋǤ-ǡ)
~ͳͻͻ͹– ʹǣʹͲͲ͸ǡ

ͳ ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͶ͵
ͳͷǤ ǤǡǤ ǡǤ ©ǡ
Ǥȋ
ǡǡe)
-
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͷͷ
ͳ͸Ǥ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ

ȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ͸͵
ͳ͹Ǥ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ Sǡ Ǥ ǡǤ ȋ
Ȍ

0

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ͸ͻ
ͳͺǤ GǤ ā-©ǡǤ 0©ȋȌ
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ͹ͻ
ͳͻǤ Ǥ
ǡǤ ǡǤ ȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͺͷ
ʹͲǤ VǤ ǡǤ
ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ
ȋ Ȍ

-

Ǥ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳͻͷ
VII
5Ǥ
ǣ
,
TOPIC 5. GEOTECHNICAL MATERIAL MODELS AND NUMERICAL METHODS
ʹͳǤ ǤǡǤ ȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹͲ͵
ʹʹǤ Ǥ ǡǤ ǡǤ ǡǤȋ)
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹͳ͵
ʹ͵Ǥ VǤ ǡǤ ǡǤ ǡǤǡǤ ǡǤ ȋ
ǡȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹʹͷ
6Ǥ
ǣ 0
e

TOPIC 6. OBSERVATIONAL METHOD, PREDICTION AND MONITORING
ʹͶǤ Ǥ e©©ǡǤ «ǡ~Ǥ ©ȋȌ

,

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹ͵͹
ʹͷǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ ©ǡǤ ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ ©ȋȌ
e
,
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹͶͷ
7Ǥ
ǣ e ǡ ǡ ǡ
~

TOPIC 7. SOIL AND ROCK IMPROVEMENT
ʹ͸Ǥ ǤǡǤ ȋȌ

-

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹͷͷ
ʹ͹Ǥ Ǥ©ȋȌ
Ǥͳ ǡ
ǡ~ ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹ͸ͷ
ʹͺǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ©ǡǡ©ǡǡ©ǡǡ©ǡǤ ©ȋȌ
0 ,
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹ͹͹
ʹͻǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ ©©ǡǤ ©ȋȌ
eǤ͵~ʙʛ ͺ͹͸Ϊ͵ʹͷǤͲͲ
ʙʛ ͺ͹͸ΪͺʹͷǤͲͲαͷͲͲǤͲͳʔ-͹ͷ ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹͺͷ
VIII
8Ǥ
ǣe
TOPIC 8. SLOPE STABILITY AND LANDSLIDES
͵ͲǤ Ǥ*©ǡǤ ©ǡǤ © ȋȌ

,, ee ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ʹͻ͵
͵ͳǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ©ǡ~Ǥ ~©ȋȌ

,* ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵Ͳͳ
͵ʹǤ Ǥ©ȋȌ
e
0

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵ͳͳ
͵͵Ǥ Ǥ©ǡǤ © ȋȌ

e
0

Ƿǲ , ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵ͳ͹
͵ͶǤ Ǥ ©ǡǤā©ǡǤ~©ǡ Ǥ© ȋȌ
e
e

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵ʹͷ
9Ǥ
ǣ,
TOPIC 9. FLOOD PROTECTION DYKES AND EARTH AND ROCKFILL DAMS
͵ͷǤ ǤǡǤȋȌ

S ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵͵͵
10Ǥ
ǣ - eǡ

TOPIC 10. PILES, DIAPHRAGM WALLS AND OTHER FOUNDATION METHODS
͵͸Ǥ Ǥ ©ǡǤ ©ǡǤǡǤ*© ȋǡ

Ȍ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵Ͷ͵
͵͹Ǥ Ǥ«ǡVǤ ǡ~Ǥ © ȋȌ
e ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵ͷ͹
͵ͺǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ©ȋȌ
e
-e ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵͸ͷ
͵ͻǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ©ȋȌ
,
e
, ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵͹ͷ
ͶͲǤ Ǥā©ǡǤ©ǡǤā©-© ȋȌ
e
,
~,
e
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵ͺͷ
IX
ͶͳǤ Ǥ©ǡǤā©ǡǤǡǤā©-© ȋȌ
e
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͵ͻ͵
ͶʹǤ ǡǤǡǤȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͶͲͳ
Ͷ͵Ǥ ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ©ȋ)

~
,
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷͳ͵
ͶͶǤ Ǥǡ Ǥ©ȋ)
, -e
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷͳͻ
11Ǥ
ǣ
* ǣǡ~

TOPIC 11. GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF ROADS, RAILWAYS AND AIRPORTS
ͶͷǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ ā©-©ǡ

Ǥ ©ǡǤ ©ȋȌ
e~

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷʹ͹
Ͷ͸Ǥ Ǥ ā©ǡǤ ©ǡǤ ā©-©ȋȌ
e
e ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷ͵͵
12Ǥ
ǣ ,
ǡe

TOPIC 12. ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICS, SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Ͷ͹Ǥ Ǥ ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ0©ǡǤ©©ǡǤ,ȋȌ

, 0
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷ͵ͻ
13Ǥ
ǣ ,
TOPIC 13. SEISMIC MICRO ZONING AND SEISMIC RISK
ͶͺǤ ~Ǥ©ȋȌ
-
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͶͶͷ
ͶͻǤ Ǥā©ǡǤeȋȌ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷ͸ͷ
ͷͲǤ Ǥǡ Ǥ©ǡ Ǥ ©ȋȌ
,
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷ͹͵
ͷͳǤ Ǥ ǡVǤ ǡǤ ǡ Ǥ ǡ Ǥ ǡǤ (
)
ʡ

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷͺͳ
X
14Ǥ
ǣ
TOPIC 14. OTHER TOPICS OF INTEREST
ͷʹǤ ~Ǥ~©ǡǤ©ǡǡ © ȋȌ
-

,
~
ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷͺ͹
ͷ͵Ǥ Ǥæ©ǡǤ~©ǡǤ©ǡǤ©ȋ
Ȍ
~ ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ Ͷͻ͵
XI

Ȁȋ Ȍ
«ææǡā
æǡ
¯Ǥ æ
© ā æ
« ā ǡ ǡ
«ǡǡ«
¯Ǥ
æā«¯ʹͲͲͷǤ
¯āȋ
Ȍ
æ«āǡæǡ
æ ǤǤ ¯
Ǥ
««Ǥā

æǤǡ æ
æǤ
ā ͷ͵
Ǥ«
æ ͷ a «ǡ
ͳͶ «ǡǤ
ͳǤ – ,

0
ǡ

ʹǤ
0
͵Ǥ
,
0
ͶǤ ~ǡǡ

ͷǤ
,
͸Ǥ 0
e
͹Ǥ e ǡ ǡ ǡ~

ͺǤ e
ͻǤ ,
ͳͲǤ - eǡ

ͳͳǤ
* ǣǡ~
ͳʹǤ ,
ǡe

ͳ͵Ǥ ,
ͳͶǤ

© ā
Ǥ
¯«
ā«Ǥ
ā
«¯
«©
Ǥ
ǣǤ ©ǡ

ǡʹͲͳͻǤ ,ǣ0©ǡ
XII
1
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.3
PRESENT AND FUTURE OF TESTING, ROCK

CHARACTERIZATION AND MONITORING
WITH AN EMPHASIZE ON ISRM SUGGESTED
METHODS
5HúDWUlusay
Hacettepe University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Geological
Engineering, 06800 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey
ABSTRACT
In rock mechanics and rock engineering, the models developed depend considerably on the
input data such as boundary conditions (e.g. in-situ stresses, groundwater and geometry of
engineering work), rock material and rock mass properties. Correct evaluation of the
properties of rock material, discontinuities and rock mass frequently requires laboratory and
in-situ tests, supplemented with a high degree of experience and judgment. Accordingly, since
1974, the ISRM Commission on Testing Methods has spent considerable effort in developing
a succession of the ISRM Suggested Methods (SMs) for different aspects of rock mechanics.
This paper emphasizes the need and importance of standardization of rock testing methods
within the context of the ISRM SMs, gives a guideline for their development and the
procedures followed for their evaluation, and briefly introduces current developments and
main near future trends in rock characterization, testing and monitoring.
KEYWORDS: Rock mechanics, ISRM, testing, rock charaacterization, monitoring
POSTOJEĆE STANJE I BUDUûNOST ISPITIVANJA,

KARAKTERIZACIJA I MONITORING STENA SA
NAGLASNOM NA PREDLOŽENIM ISRM
METODAMA
REZIME
U mehanici stena i inženjeringu stena modeli se razvijaju zavisno od ulaznih podataka kao
ãWRVXJUDQLþQLXslovi (npr. In situ situ, podzemne vode i geometrija inženjerskih radova),
svojstva stena i svojstva stenske mase. Ispravna procena svojstava stenskog materijala,
GLVNRQWLQXLWHWD L VWHQVNH PDVH þHVWR ]DKWHYD ODERUDWRULMVNH L LQ-situ testove, dopunjene
visokim stepenom iskustva i procene. Shodno tome, od 1974. godine, Komisija za ispitivanje
metoda ISRM-a uloåLODMH]QDþDMQHQDSRUHXuspešan razvoj predloženih metoda ISRM-a za
UD]OLþLWHDVSHNWHPHKDQLNHVWHQD2YDMUDGQDJODãDYDSRWUHEXL]QDþDMVWDQGDUGL]DFLMHPHWRGD
ispitivanja stena u kontekstu preloženih (SM) ISRM, pruža smernice za njihov razvoj i
2
postupke koji se prate za njihovu ocenu, a ukratko predstavlja trenutna dešavanja i glavne
trendove u karakterizaciji, ispitivanju i praüenju u skoroj buduünosti .
./-8ý1(5(ý,0HKDQLNDVWHQD,650LVSLWLYDQMHNDUDNWHULVWLNDVWHQDPRQLWRULQJ
INTRODUCTION
Rocks have been used as a construction material since the down of civilization and different
structures have been built in or on rocks. There are many historical remains related to rocks
from various civilizations all over the world. Mankind also built underground structures in
past, and some examples can be still found in different parts of the World as can be seen from
some selected examples in Fig. 1. However, it is quite arguable who were the pioneers of
mechanical laws governing solids and fluids and their testing and monitoring techniques in
view of huge engineered structures related to rock built in different parts of the World and
some of which were built more than thousands years ago with a high precision of modern
days.
The term “rock mechanics” refers to the basic science of mechanics applied to rocks. The
application of mechanics on a large scale to a pre-stressed, naturally occurring material is the
main factor distinguishing rock mechanics from other engineering disciplines. The first rock
mechanics experimental studies were performed by
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 1. Some examples from the historical rock-hewn structures: (a) an underground city and (b)
cliff settlement in Cappadocia, Turkey (Photos: R. Ulusay), (c) church from
Lalibela (Ethiopia) (Ethiopian Tourism Organization), (d) a rock-hewn settlement in Bezelik (East
Turkmenistan) (after Aydan, 2012).
3
Gauthey, who built a testing machine using the lever system (Fig. 2a) and measured the
compressive strength of cubic specimens, in about 1770 for the design of the pillars for the
Sainte Genevieve Church in Paris. Gauthey noted that the compressive strength of longer
specimens was lower than the cube strength (Hudson et al., 1972). As early as 1773, Coulomb
included results of tests on rocks collected from France in his paper (Coulomb, 1776;
Heyman, 1972) and then some testing machines to determine strength of materials and rocks
have been developed (Fig. 2b). During the early part of the 20th century, interesting works
on the failure of rock materials was conducted in Europe (Karman, 1911; King, 1912), in the
US (Griggs, 1936; Handin, 1953), playing pioneering roles in the development of high
pressure loading testing machines. In experimental rock mechanics, important developments
were performed between 1945 and 1960, based on laboratory large-scaled experimental
works by Mogi (1959), the studies on friction of discontinuities by Jaeger (1959, 1960) and
large-scale triaxial tests performed by Blanks and McHenry (1945), and Golder and Akroyd
(1954). In addition, studies by Rocha et al. (1955) and John (1962) motivated a more common
use of large scale field shear testing of rock discontinuities in many parts of the world. The
subject of rock mechanics started in the 1950s from a rock physics base and gradually became
a discipline in its own right during the 1960s. Rock mechanics was born as a new discipline
in 1962 in Salzburg, Austria, mainly by the efforts of Professor Leopold Müller and he
officially endorsed at the first congress of the ISRM in 1966.
(a) (b)
Fig. 2. Examples of some old testing machines: (a) Gauthey’s testing machine
(after Timoshenko, 1953), (c) a testing machine of the 1880s (after Abbott, 1884).
The term “rock engineering” refers to any engineering activity involving rocks, in other
words, or the use of rock mechanics in rock engineering within the context of civil, mining
and petroleum engineering such as dams, rock slopes, tunnels, caverns, hydroelectric
schemes, mines, building foundations etc. (Hudson and Harrison, 2000) as shown in Table
1. Site investigations and laboratory and field tests provide important inputs for rock
modelling and rock engineering design approaches. Therefore, determination of rock
properties both in the laboratory and field, and monitoring of rock behaviour and rock
4
structures, provide some of the main important areas of interest in rock mechanics and rock
engineering, which are commonly applied to engineering for civil, mining and petroleum
purposes. After the formal development of rock mechanics, increasing demands from rock
engineering studies and rapid advances in technology resulted in development of a number
of laboratory testing and site characterization methods. In addition, recognition of the fact
that laboratory test results from a small specimen of rock cannot be directly applied to solve
all rock engineering problems (unlike the case of soils), attentions have been focused on
the development of in-situ tests and monitoring techniques in rock mechanics. After the
establishment of the ISRM Commission on Testing Methods in 1966, a number of
laboratory and field testing methods to be used in rock engineering were developed and/or
improved with the efforts of the Commission, its Working Groups and cooperation among
other ISRM Commissions, based on the previous experiences and new developments in
technology.
Table 1. Main areas of application of rock engineering (Ulusay and Gercek, 2016)
Eng. Underground Surface
Design and support of long-term (galleries, shafts, etc.) and
short-term (gate roads, etc.) service openings Open-pit
Design and support of production excavations (e.g. planning
longwalls, stopes, room-and-pillar panels, etc.) and design:
Design of pillars for room-and-pillar works, long-wall Stability of rock
panels, shafts, etc. slopes
Mining
Surface effects (i.e. subsidence) due to underground Bench design

excavations Road design
Rock or coal bursts, acoustic emission
ragmentation (i.e. breaking, crushing, grinding) of rocks for mineral processing
Drilling, blasting, fracturing, cutting, digging, ripping, etc.
Design and support of tunnels for

Transportation (road, railway, subway, navigational)
Civil
Conveyance (water, drainage, sewer) Stability of rock

Utility (water, electricity, cable, gas) slopes (natural or
Power plants (access, intake, pressure, tailrace, etc.) man-made) for
5
Design and support of caverns for highways or

Energy and science railways
Hydroelectric power plants canals
Nuclear power plants etc.
Research facilities (e.g. CERN, neutrino detector)
Storage
– Oil, water, natural gas, compressed air Rock foundations
– Waste (chemical, nuclear) for
– Others (grain, food, etc.) buildings,
Public dams,
– Dwellings, train or subway stations, parking garages bridges,
– Shopping, cultural, and sports centers etc.
– Offices, factories
Defense
– Public (shelters, storage)
– Military (arms, ammunition, vehicles, planes)
– Nuclear (ICBM silos, defense command centers)
Mechanical properties and behavior of cap and reservoir rocks
Petroleum &
Natural Gas
Drilling wells
Design and stability of wellbores, borehole breaks out
Hydro fracturing
In this paper, test method and importance of standardization of rock testing methods are
introduced within the context of the ISRM Suggested Methods (SMs) and the emphasis is
given on providing brief information about the tasks of the ISRM Commission on Testing
Methods, principles followed in developing the ISRM SMs and recent progresses related to
the ISRM SMs. Finally, current developments and future needs/trends in testing, rock
characterization and monitoring methods are briefly discussed.
TEST METHOD, STANDARD AND ISRM SUGGESTED METHODS
Test Method and Standards
“Test method” is a definitive procedure for the identification, measurement and evaluation
of one or more qualities, characteristics or properties of a material. Numerous test methods
have also been developed for direct or indirect determination of a certain physical or
mechanical property of rock materials. However, only a few of them have become widely-
used or recognized. For example, although a number of methods have been suggested to
determine the tensile strength of intact rock, only one method (i.e. the Brazilian or splitting
tensile strength test; ISRM 1981, 2007; ASTM, 2008) has become the most widely-used one
in rock engineering. Although the direct tensile test (ISRM 1981, 2007; ASTM, 2008) is the
other one of the two recommended test methods to determine the tensile strength, it has not
been as popular as the Brazilian test due to the difficulties involved. Furthermore, repeated
execution of the same test method on the same rock material, whether by the same operator
in the same laboratory using the same equipment or by different operators in different
6
laboratories using equipment of similar design, will not always yield comparable results. In
this respect, one should consider the "repeatability" and "reproducibility" of a particular
testing method, which generally are not readily available. Both terms are ways of measuring
precision, particularly in the fields of chemistry and engineering.
“Standard” is a document that has been developed and established within the consensus
principles of a society and that meets the approval requirements of that society’s principles
and regulations. Basically, standards include requirements and/or recommendations in
relation to products, systems, processes or services. Standards can also be a way to describe
a measurement or test method or to establish a common terminology within a specific sector.
Standards are voluntary which means that there is no automatic legal obligation to apply
them. However, laws and regulations may refer to standards and even make compliance with
them compulsory. There is also the practical aspect that it may be wished to specify
something about the rock conditions in contracts, then it is useful to use standardized methods
within contractual procedures. the advantages of the standardization of rock testing methods
as follow (Hudson and Harrison, 2000): (i) the standardization guidance is helpful to anyone
conducting the test; (ii) the results obtained by different organizations on rocks at different
sites can be compared in the knowledge that 'like is being compared with like', and (iii) there
is a source of recommended procedures for use in contracts, if required.
There are national bodies which produce standards for their own countries, in particular,
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) in US, and many other countries, such
as British Standards (BS) in the UK and Deutsche Industrie Normen (DIN) in Germany, and
the methods suggested by Japanese Geotechnical Society (JGS) etc. The published testing
methods from ASTM and ISRM are compared in Table 2. It is clear from Table 2 that the
ISRM has more published methods on rock testing. Although different European countries
had their own standards, now they are going to be joined in CEN (European Committee for
Standardization). It is the responsibility of the CEN National Members to implement
European Standards as national standards. The National Standardization Bodies distribute
and sell the implemented European Standard and have to withdraw any conflicting national
standards. It became the reference design code for geotechnical design within the European
Union (EU) and has also been adopted by a number of other countries beyond the EU. But
the development of EUROCODE 7 (i.e. European Standard for Geotechnical Engineering
Design or, shortly, EC7) has been undertaken from the point of view of foundations and
retaining structures on and in soils (Harrison, 2014). It is now widely recognized that EC7 is,
in many ways, inappropriate – and, in some circumstances, inapplicable – to rock
engineering.
ISRM Suggested Methods
Some Commissions on different aspects of rock mechanics and rock engineering were
established by the ISRM. One of these Commissions, called “Commission on Testing
Methods”, was the “Commission on Standardization of Laboratory and Field Tests” which
was established in 1966 at the time of the 1st ISRM Congress. The objectives of this
Commission are:
7
(i) to generate and publish SMs for testing or measuring properties of rocks and rock
masses, as well as for monitoring the performance of rock engineering structures,
(ii) to raise or upgrade the existing SMs based on recent developments and publish them
in book form,
(iii) to solicit ad invite researchers to develop new methods, procedures or equipment for
tests, measurements and the monitoring required for rock mechanics and laboratory or
field studies, and
(iv) to encourage collaboration of those who practice in rock mechanics testing.
(v) to cooperate with other ISRM Commissions for the development of new SMs.
Table 2. Comparison of the testing methods published by the ISRM and ASTM
Test/Monitoring/Characterization methods ISRM ASTM

Petrographic description of rocks a,b 3
Quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses a,b 3

Standard practice for rock core drilling and sampling of rock for
3
site exploration
Water content and density determinations a,b 3 3
In-situ density determination by sand replacement, water
3
replacement, nuclear methods
Porosity and absorption determinations a,b 3
Hardness (Schmidt hammer) test a,b,c 3 3
Shore hardness test a,b 3
Indentation hardness index test b 3
Abrasivity of rock using the Cerchar testc 3 3
Determination of sound velocity by ultrasonic pulse a,b,c 3 3
Slake durability test a,b 3 3
Point load test b 3 3
Tensile strength test (Direct and Brazilian tests) a,b 3 3
Uniaxial compressive strength and deformability tests (E,Q) a,b 3 3
Triaxial compression test (Laboratory) b 3 3
Laboratory testing of swelling rocks b 3
Shear strength determination of rock joints (Laboratory) a,b,c 3 3
Block punch strength index test b 3
Needle penetration testc 3
Creep characteristics of rock materials (Laboratory)c 3 3
Freezing and thawing test 3
Wetting and drying test 3
Reporting rock laboratory test data in electronic formatc 3
Determination of Mode I fracture toughness using Notched
3
Brazilian Disc b 3
and Semi-Circular Bend Specimenc methods
Determination of Mode II fracture toughness c 3
Dynamic strength parameters and Mode I fracture toughness of
3
rock material c
Complete stress-strain curve for intact rock in uniaxial
3
compressionb
Permeability determination of rock material (Laboratory) 3
8

Rock bolt testing a,b 3 3
Rock anchorage testing a,b 3 3
Rapid field identification of swelling and slaking rocks b 3
Large scale sampling and 3-axial testing of jointed rock (Field) b 3
In-situ determination of shear strength of rock discontinuities a,b 3 3
Geophysical logging of boreholes a,b 3
Seismic testing within and between boreholes b 3
Land geophysics in rock engineering b 3
Borehole geophysics in rock engineeringb 3
In-situ rock mass deformability determination using plate
3 3
loading method b
In-situ rock mass deformability determination using large flat
3
jack method b
In-situ rock mass deformability determination using flexible and
3
stiff dilatometers b
Monitoring rock movements using extensometers b 3 3
Monitoring rock movements using inclinometers b 3 3
Monitoring rock movements using tiltmeters b 3
Monitoring rock movements using sliding micrometer b 3
In-situ stress estimation by overcoring method b 3 3
Monitoring for rock displacements using the Global Positioning
3 3
System (GPS) b
In-situ stress estimation using a USBM-type drill hole
3
deformation gauge b
In-situ stress estimation using a CSIR- or CSIRO-type cell with
3
9 or 12 strain gauges b
In-situ stress estimation using compact conical-ended borehole
3
overcoring technique b
Strategy for rocks stress estimation b 3
Hydraulic fracturing and/or hydraulic testing of pre-existing
3
fractures b
Quality control of rock stress estimation b 3
Establishing a model for the in-situ stress at a given site c 3
In-situ creep test 3
In-situ uniaxial compressive test 3
Pressure monitoring using hydraulic cells a, b 3
Blast vibration monitoring a, b 3
Rock fracture observations using borehole digital optical
3
televiewer c
Step-rate injection method for fracture in-situ properties c 3
In situ microseismic monitoring of fracturing process in rock
3
masses (2016)
Uniaxial-strain compressibility testing for reservoir
3
geomechanics (2016)
Determining thermal properties of rocks from laboratory tests at
3
atmospheric pressure (2016)
Laboratory Acoustic Emission monitoring (2017) 3
Determining the basic friction angle of planar rock surfaces by
3
means of tilt test (2018)
9

In-situ acoustic emission monitoring of the fracturing process in
3
rock masses (2019)
Determining deformation and failure characteristics of rocks
3
subjected to true three-axial test (2019)
The Lugeon Test (2019) 3
aISRM (1981; Yellow Book); bISRM (2007; Blue Book); cISRM (2015; Orange Book)
The term ‘Suggested Method’ has been carefully chosen: these are not standards; they are
explanations of recommended procedures to follow in the various aspects of rock
characterization, testing and monitoring. An “ISRM SM” is a document that has been
developed and established within the consensus principles of the ISRM and that meets the
approval requirements of the ISRM procedures and regulations. The ISRM SMs can be
used as standards on a particular project if required for contractual reasons, but they are
intended more as guidance. The purpose of the ISRM SMs is, therefore, to offer guidance for
rock characterization procedures, laboratory and field testing and monitoring in rock
engineering. The SMs are developed voluntarily by the Working Groups established by the
ISRM Commission on Testing Methods. From 1974 to the present the ISRM has generated
70 SMs. They are classified into four groups, namely: Site Characterization, Laboratory
Testing, Field Testing and Monitoring. All the ISRM SMs were compiled in three ISRM
Books namely; the Yellow Book (ISRM, 1981), the Blue Book (ISRM, 2007) and the Orange
Book (ISRM, 2015). The general content of an ISRM SM consists of the following parts: 1.
Introduction, 2. Scope, 3. Apparatus or device or tool, 4. Procedure: (a) Specimen preparation
(for laboratory tests), (b) testing, 5. Calculations, 6. Presentation of results, 7. Notes and
recommendations (if necessary), 8. Acknowledgements (if necessary) and References.
The SM development is undertaken by Working Groups (WGs), where experts appointed by

the Commission members come together and develop a draft that will become the future SM.
The following guideline is recommended by the ISRM Commission on Testing Methods to
the volunteers and invited Working Groups (WG) who intend to develop new or to upgrade
the current ISRM SMs.
1. The proposed SM must be directly related to rock mechanics and rock engineering (a
laboratory or field testing method or a monitoring technique).
2. It should have been experienced at different laboratories or under different site conditions
by different investigators and its results should have acceptable levels of repeatability and
reproducibility. The testing device or equipment should also be clearly described or
commercially available.
3. The effects of the testing device, specimen dimensions, environmental conditions etc. on
the rock property, which will be determined or measured, should have been investigated
in necessary detail and clearly defined.
4. Before the proposal of the SM is submitted to the Commission, some papers and/or
reports on the proposed method should have been published.
5. Proposals of upgraded versions of the current ISRM SMs may also be recommended.
10
6. A proposal should be prepared by a WG, which is established by a Chairman or Co-

chairmen and consist of investigators, who are studying the same or similar method in
different countries.
A proposal for an SM, which will be submitted to the Commission, should include the
followings: a. Scope, b. Content of the method (testing procedure) and some information on
the test device to be used, c. List of WG members and d. Work plan and date of submission
of the draft document to the Commission.
FUTURE TRENDS IN ROCK CHARACTERIZATION, TESTING AND

MONITORING
Considering the current and new areas of application for rock engineering, the level of
sophistication reached in electronic measurement and control systems, the advances in data
acquisition and processing methods, and the developments in the testing of other materials,
etc., rock testing methods covered by the ISRM SMs are far from complete. As a matter of
fact, there are already new working groups occupied in developing new ISRM SMs. These
SMs, which are under preparation, are as follows:
(a) Dynamic shear testing of rock discontinuities and interfaces,
(b) 3-D laser scanning techniques for application to rock mechanics and rock
engineering.
The following proposals for new and upgraded ISRM SMs are under revision and/or under
preparation: (i) In-situ direct shear strength determination (static), and (ii) In-situ uniaxial
and triaxial compression tests, (iii) Upgraded SM for discontinuity characteristics,
The complexity of modern rock engineering suggests that there are some issues requiring
further investigations and a need for further developments in experimental methods which
may also lead to generation of new ISRM SMs. Main near future trends and needs in
experimental rock mechanics, rock characterization and monitoring are briefly discussed in
the following paragraphs.
Determination of the strength and deformability for "difficult rocks" is an important issue in
terms of experimental rock mechanics. This term mainly includes soft rocks and block-in-
matrix rocks (Bimrocks). Soft rocks are critical geo-materials since they present several types
of problems, such as low strength, disaggregation, crumbling, high plasticity, slaking, fast
weathering and many other characteristics (Fig. 3a). Many soft rocks absorb moisture and
deteriorate with time, some very rapidly. They have intermediate strength between soils and
hard rocks, therefore, in some cases, they are too soft to be tested in rock mechanics
equipment and too hard for soil mechanics equipment, and their mechanical properties are
highly sensitive to variations in their water content (Kanji, 2014). Based on the latest
progresses in China on soft rock mechanics, He (2014) reported that the large deformation
mechanism of engineering soft rocks using sophisticated equipment is to be understood
through numerous experiments. But sampling from soft rocks, their site characterization and
classification under the usual systems such as RMR and Q, which are generally applicable to
11
discontinuous media made of hard rocks, are other difficulties. Therefore, specimen
preparation techniques for such rocks, that are sensitive to moisture changes (Fig. 3b), need
to be developed and there is still a need for further investigations to develop new laboratory
and in-situ testing methods in conjunction with the adaptation of some existing methods for
soft rocks and rock masses behaving as soft rocks.
(a) (b)
Fig. 3. (a) A view from a soft rock, (b) reduction in strength depending on saturation for some soft
Cappadocian tuffs of Turkey and Oya tuff of Japan (Aydan and Ulusay, 2003)
Bimrocks are the mixture of rocks composed of geotechnically significant blocks within
bonded matrix of finer texture such as melanges, faulted/fractured rocks and other complex
geological mixtures (e.g., Medley, 1994; Fig. 4a). Due to their complex heterogeneity and
mechanical variability, the correct geomechanical characterization and determination of their
strength and deformability are quite challenging issues, and in such cases, reducing expensive
and inconvenient surprises in rock engineering applications has a prime importance.
Mechanical properties of the matrix, the volumetric block proportion (VBP), shape and size
distribution of blocks, and their orientation relative to failure surfaces are the main factors
affecting the overall mechanical properties of bimrocks. Based on the study on a physical
model mélange by Lindquist (1994), when the block proportions are between about 25% and
70%, the increase in the overall mechanical properties of bimrocks are mainly related to the
volumetric block proportion (VBP) in the rock mass (Fig. 4b). In Fig. 4c, bimrock specimens
with different volumetric block proportions of about 30% (low), 50% (medium) and 75%
(high) are shown with different axial loadings (00, 300, 600, 900). The results obtained from
the triaxial tests by Lindquist (1994) using these samples indicated that as VBP increased,
frictional strength increased while cohesion decreased. Neglecting the contributions of
blocks to overall bimrock strength, choosing instead to design on the basis of the strength of
weak matrix may be too conservative for many bimrocks in terms of rock engineering design
(Medley, 2008).
12
(a) (b)
30
Scott Dam melange
Physical models
()
Irfan and Tang (1993)
20
g
Scott Dam melange
10
Conservative trend
(Lindquist 1994)
0
0 20 40 60 80
Volumetric Block Proportion (%)
(c)
30° 30° 30°
VBP: Low Medium High VBP: Low Medium High

60° 60° 60° 90° 90° 90°
VBP: Low Medium High VBP: Low Medium High
Fig. 4. (a) A typical bimrock consisting of blocks (in red circles) in a sheared shale matrix shown by
yellow arrows (Medley 2007), (b) strength of bimrocks increasing with volumetric block proportion,
VBP (Lindquist, 1994), (c) different block orientations and VBP values (rearranged from Lindquist,
1994).
Some efforts have been performed to assess the strength of bimrocks or faulted/frcatured
zones based on physical models and empirical approaches (e.g., Lindquist, 1994; Aydan et
al., 1997; Sönmez et al., 2009), in-situ tests (e.g., Li et al., 2004; Coli et al., 2011), and
equivalent material techniques (e.g., Aydan et al., 1995). In case of small blocks floating in
a soft matrix, there is a chance to correlate VBP and bimrock friction angle (Coli et al., 2011)
by in-situ large shear box tests. However, when the sizes of huge blocks exceed the dimension
of the large shear box, in-situ testing for bimrocks becomes insufficient. Since there is still
no consensus on the available methods to determine strength and deformability properties of
bimrocks, further studies and comparison of their results with existing experiences to develop
more efficient methods for the assessment of the in-situ characterization of bimrocks,
introducing them in rock mass classification and determination of their geomechanical
properties are needed.
13
In order to overcome the difficulties associated with testing on soft and weak rocks and
sampling from historical sites, the use of non-destructive techniques has been receiving great
attention in recent years. The needle penetration test, as an ISRM SM (Ulusay et al., 2014;
ISRM, 2015), is one of the non-destructive testing methods. Although its use in experimental
geomechanics dates back to the 1960s and has been mostly considered in soil mechanics
(Viggiani and Hall, 2012), X-ray computed tomography (CT) scanning technique has
becoming widely used as a promising non-destructive method in rock engineering to
visualize and to investigate various conditions and processes (cracking, porosity, damage,
corrosion, diffusion) in porous and fractured rocks without any disturbance (Figure 5a).
Based on idea “the thermal response of geo-materials would be observed as mechanical
energy which is transformed into heat during deformation and fracturing, several scientific
studies have been carried out in recent years on the infrared radiation in the process of rock
deformation leading to fracturing and failure (e.g. Prendes-Gero et al., 2013; Luong and
Emami, 2014). Figure 5b shows an example of the infrared thermograph images of samples
in Brazilian compression experiments associated with fracturing. The infrared thermograph
images indicate that high temperature bands appear along some zones before rupture and
these bands eventually constitute the major fracture zones. The application and use of this
technique to detect and evaluate quantitatively the extent of damage in brittle geo-materials
owing to the non-linear coupled thermo-mechanical effects are quite promising.
As a branch of rock mechanics, rock dynamics deals with the responses of rock under
dynamic stress fields, where an increased rate of loading (or impulsive loading) induces a
change in the mechanical behavior of the rock materials and rock masses. When compared
to other aspects of rock mechanics, except a dynamic laboratory test method suggested by
the ISRM (Zhou et al., 2012; ISRM, 2015), guidance and standards and/or SMs for rock
dynamics testing are generally lacking. Therefore, there are many issues in rock dynamics
testing requiring further investigations, such as shear strength of rock joints under dynamic
loads in order to understand the rate effects on shear strength and dilation, and assessment of
mechanical and physical causes of the rate effects on the rock strength and failure pattern,
etc.
The dynamic responses of geo-materials during fracturing have not received any attention in
the fields of geo-engineering. These responses may be very important in the failure
phenomenon of engineering structures (i.e. rock burst, squeezing, sliding) and the high
ground motions induced by earthquakes.
14
(a)
(b)
Fig. 5. Examples of some promising non-destructive test methods: (a) X-Ray CT scan images and CT
value distribution with height at different time intervals for a tuff sample (Sato and Aydan, 2014), (b)
infrared thermograph images of samples in Brazilian experiments (Aydan, 2014).
It has been crucial to understand the strength characteristic and nonlinear deformation
behavior of rocks due to the increasing worldwide demand for the exploitation of deep
resources, giant hydraulic and hydropower projects, deeper transportation tunnels and
construction of nuclear power plants, wellbore stability etc. As these structures become
deeper, rock burst, as a typical failure phenomenon, occurs more and more frequently. In
addition, research into the mechanisms of earthquakes is also an important impetus. In many
of the cases mentioned above, the actual rock mass undergoes real stress states that
accommodate 3-axial components. Research on the problem of rock mechanics at great
depths has become a hot topic and some remarkable results have been achieved. The basic
mechanical properties of rocks at great depths, including deformation, failure and strength,
are different from those at a shallow depth and with the additional effects of high ground
temperature, high ground stress and high pore pressure rock mechanical behavior is more
complex. Because a conventional triaxial compression test is conducted on cylindrical
15
samples under a uniform lateral pressure, it does not provide accurate information on real 3-
D conditions due to the well-known influence of the intermediate principal stress on rock
failure (Handin et al., 1967). Therefore, true-triaxial rock testing (TTT) device, which can
reproduce a real stress environment of a rock mass, can improve the understanding of the
mechanical properties of rocks (Fig. 6a). After Mogi’s original work and the TTT device he
developed, the strength and deformation of rocks have been investigated with the aid of
different types of TTT devices (e.g., Mogi, 1977; Takahashi and Koide, 1989; Chang and
Haimson, 2000; Kwasniewski et al., 2003; Chen and Feng, 2006; He et al., 2010; Lee and
Haimson, 2011). Most recently, Feng et al. (2016) developed a Mogi type TTT device (Fig.
6b), free from some previously restrictions reported in literature. Finally, an ISRM SM for
true 3-axial test (Feng et al., 2019) has been published. However, that all of these
observations need further investigation by researchers and should be pursued in future
experimental studies. A database of TTT results, verification of constitutive relationships,
more incorporation with acoustic emission (AE) and micro-seismic measurements etc. would
be important. The behaviour of anisotropic and jointed rocks under true triaxial stress
conditions should also be experimentally investigated more thoroughly and application of
this method in highly stressed environments for predicting and prevention of rock bursts
would be useful.
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. (a) Loading schemes to generate: (I) an axisymmetric (CTC: Conventional 3-axial
Compression) and (ii) true 3-axial (TTC: True 3-axial Compression) compressive state of stress in
rock samples (Kwasniewski, 2013), (b) schematic view of a true 3-axial apparatus showing the
loading directions of the specimen (Feng et al., 2016).
Rock spalling is also an important aspect in rock engineering, particularly in underground

studies (Fig.7). As emphasized by Diederichs (2008), the focus is mainly on spalling in hard
and low porosity rocks. In terms of experimental rock mechanics, the near future primary
tasks are providing guidelines for laboratory procedures to detect damage thresholds
(Ghazvinian et al., 2012) and suggesting field observations using the televiewer, core disking
etc. which can be used during investigations to assess spalling potential. The exact
mechanism of spalling in foliated rocks also needs clarification and preparation of a SM on
laboratory determination of crack initiation and critical damage thresholds of brittle rocks
will also be one of the valuable guidelines.
16
Fig. 7. Examples of spalling in underground openings (Kaiser, 2010).
Although there are laboratory test methods to determine the properties of rocks in terms of
excavatability and borability for the proper selection and performance prediction of
mechanical miners and rock cutting machines (e.g. roadheader, surface miner, TBM, drum
shearer, continuous miner, raise borer etc), and they are given in the literature in necessary
detail (e.g., Bruland, 1998; Bilgin et al., 2014), some of the methods have still no standard or
suggested method. By considering the increasing interest in TBMs (tunnel boring machines)
and deep borings, some improvements on determination of excavatability and borability
parameters and preparation of associated suggested methods are also some of the near future
expectations which may assist considerably in the effort of predicting excavatability and in
the assessment of borability performance.
The use of rock mechanics in petroleum engineering has become increasingly important since
the 1970s. In terms of rock testing, the factors are mainly the measurement of in-situ stresses,
particularly shale and sandstone characterization, and petroleum engineering related
laboratory tests such as the thermo-hydro-mechanical behavior of shales (ARMA, 2012).
Boring and testing issues, including coring guidelines and best practices, minimizing and
identifying core damage, sample preparation and handling, “best-practice” testing protocols,
index testing, non-standard tests (e.g. creep, high temperature, high pressure, reactive fluids
and fractured rock) will be the important developments expected in this area in the near
future.
Contact methods like scan-line method, borehole logging method are traditionally used for
rock mass characterization. Recently, the non-contact methods for geotechnical survey have
seen rapid progress owing to their accuracy, low cost and non-interference with ongoing
work. Laser scanning and photogrammetry were the most popular non-contact methods to
characterize the rock mass properties. These techniques have been used in many engineering
fields over the last twenty years and show great promise for characterising rock surfaces.
Feng et al. (2011) indicate that 3D terrestrial laser scanning techniques have a great potential
in rock engineering applications, such as for fracture mapping, identification of rock types,
detecting water leakage, monitoring of rock mass deformations, and the associated
documentation and visualisation (Fig. 8).
17
(a) (b)
Fig 8. Some applications 3D laser scanning: (a) 3D colour model of scanning in a tunnel (Feng et
al., 2011), (b) full-automatic fracture mapping (Slob et al., 2005).
Long-term maintenance and preservation of man-made historical and modern rock structures
as well as waste disposal sites become important issues in geo-engineering. Although they
are well-known issues, quantitative evaluation methods are still lacking. Important issues are
how to evaluate the weathering and degradation rates and effect of variations in water content
on rocks with minerals or particles susceptible to water, and to incorporate these in the
stability assessments (e.g., Aydan, 2003; Ulusay and Aydan, 2011). Available methods such
as slake durability, drying and wetting, freezing and thawing, and swelling tests can be used
for the purpose. However, disintegration of rocks during wetting-drying and freezing-
thawing laboratory tests, in which weather conditions are simulated, occurs faster than the
natural processes in situ, and they are also insufficient to provide experimental data for
constitutive and mechanical modeling. Therefore, the development of new experimental
techniques and/or modification of the existing experimental methods to solve this problem
are urgently needed.
CONCLUSIONS
Since there have been important scientific developments and technological advances both in
rock mechanics and rock engineering, the importance of experimental investigations and the
determination of engineering properties of rocks and rock masses will continue as an integral
part of rock mechanics and rock engineering. We have to explore new techniques to evaluate
the behavior of rocks, discontinuities and rock masses and to graduate the conventional
testing techniques.
In terms of experimental rock mechanics, site characterization and monitoring, the followings
seem as the most popular areas of interest and are the main sources for the development of
new ISRM SMs: (a) rock dynamics; (b) characterization and testing methods for soft rocks
and bimrocks; (c) petroleum geomechanics; (d) non-destructive testing methods; (e) non-
contact methods such as 3-D laser scanning techniques in rock engineering, photogrammetry
18
etc; (f) rock mechanics at great depths and associated test methods (g) SMs to be used in
excavatability and borability studies; (h) providing guidelines for laboratory procedures to
detect damage thresholds, and (i) new and/or upgraded methods to assess rate of degradation
and be used in preservation of cultural assets. Future cooperation among the ISRM
Commissions and more international collaborations will be very helpful in the production of
new SMs. In addition, the greater integration (i.e. integrating engineering with geophysics,
engineering geology, microcosmic) can drive research to greater levels in rock mechanics.
19
REFERENCES
Abbot, A.V. (1884). Testing Machines: Their History, Construction and Use. Van Nostrand, New
York.
ARMA (2012). Workshop on Petroleum Geomechanics Testing. [Online] Available from:
http://www.arma.org/conference/ 2012/Chicago.aspx. [Accessed 15th January 2015].
ASTM (2008) Annual Book of ASTM Standards-Soil and Rock, Building Stones, Section 4,
Construction, V.04.08: West Conshohocken, Pa., ASTM International.
Aydan, Ö. (2003). The moisture migration characteristics of clay-bearing geo-materials and the
variations of their physical and mechanical properties with water content. Proceedings of
the 2nd Asian Conference on Saturated Soils (UNSAT-ASIA 2003), Osaka, 383-388.
Aydan, Ö. (2012). Historical rock mechanics and rock engineering. Tokai University, Japan,
Unpublished Notes, 9 p.
Aydan, Ö. (2014). Future advancement of rock mechanics and rock engineering (RMRE). In: Sariisik,
A., Ozkan, E., and Sariisik, G. (eds.) ROCKMEC'2014: Proceedings of the XIth Regional Rock
Mechanics Symposium, Afyon, Turkey, 27-50.
Aydan, Ö. & Ulusay, R. (2003). Geotechnical and geoenvironmental characteristics of man-made
underground structures in Cappadocia, Turkey. Engineering Geology 69: 245-272.
Aydan, Ö., Seiki, T., Jeong, G.C. & Akagi, T. (1995). A comparative study on various approaches to
model discontinuous rock mass as equivalent continuum, Proceedings of 2nd International
Conference on Mechanics of Jointed and Fractured Rocks, Vienna, 560-574.
Aydan, Ö., Shimizu, Y., Akagi, T. & Kawamoto, T. (1997). Tests for mechanical properties of model
fracture zones. ARMS'96: Proceedings of the 1st Asian Rock Mechanics Symposium, Seoul,
Korea, 643-648.
Bilgin, N., Copur, H. & Balci, C. (2014). Mechanical Excavation in Mining and Civil Industries.
London, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
Blanks, R.F. & McHenry, D. (1945). Large triaxial testing machine built by Bureau of Reclamation.
Engineering News Record, 135 (6): 171–172.
Bruland, A. (1998). Drillability test methods-hard Rock Tunnel Boring. [Online] Available from
NTNU: www.drillability. com/13A-98eng.pdf [Accessed 19th December 2014].
Chang, C. & Haimson, B. (2000). True triaxial strength and deformability of the German Continental
Deep Drilling Program (KTB) deep hole amphibolite. J Geophys Res, 105: 18999–19013.
Chen, J.T. & Feng, X.T. (2006). True triaxial testing of rocks under high stress condition. Chin J
Rock Mech Eng, 25 (8): 1537–1543 (in Chineese).
Coli, N., Berry, P. & Boldini, D. (2011) In situ non-conventional shear tests for the mechanical
characterisation of a bimrock. Int. J Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 48: 95-102.
Coulomb, C.A. (1776). Essai sur une application des regles de maximis et minimis a quelques
problemes de statique, relatifs a l'architecture, Memoires de Mathematique & de Physique,
7: 343- 382.
Diederichs M (2008) ISRM Rock Spalling Commission: Report for 2008. ISRM News Journal 11:
50-51.
Feng, Q., Wang, G. & Röshoff, K. (2011), Investigation of 3D terrestrial laser scanning techniques
for potential application to rock mechanics. Proceedings of the 12th International Congress
on Rock Mechanics, Q Qian and Y Zhou (eds.), Beijing, CRC Press, 963-968.
Feng, X.T., Zhang, X., Kong, R.. & Wang, G. (2016). Novel Mogi type true triaxial testing apparatus
DQGÕWVXVHWRREWDLQFRPSOHWHVWUHVV–strain curves of hard rocks. Rock Mech. & Rock Eng.,
49: 1649-1662.
20
Feng, X.T., Haimson, B., Li, X., Chang, C., Ma, X., Zhang, X., Ingraham, M., Suzuki, K. (2019).
ISRM Suggested Method: Determining deformation and failure characteristics of rocks
subjected to true triaxial compression. Rock Mech. & Rock Engineering, 52: 2011-2020.
Ghazvinian, E., Diederichs, M., Martin, D., Christiansson, R., Hakala, M., Gorski, B., Perras, M. &
Jacobsson, L. (2012). Prediction thresholds for FUDFNLQLWÕDWLRQDQGSURSDJDWLRQLQ
crystalline rocks. ISRM Commission on Spall Prediction Report on Testing Procedures
2012.
Golder, H.Q, & Akroyd, T.N.W. (1954). An apparatus for triaxial compression tests at high pressures.
Géotechnique, 4 (4): 131–136.
Griggs, D.T. (1936) Deformation of rocks under high confining pressures. Journal of Geology, 44:
541-577.
Handin, J. (1953). An application of high pressure geophysics: experimental rock mechanics.
Transactions American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 75: 315–324.
Handin, J., Heard, H.C. & Magouirk J.N. (1967). Effects of the intermediate principal stress on the
failure of limestone, dolomite and glass at different temperatures and strain rates. J.
Geophys. Res., 72: 611–640.
Harrison, J.P. (2014). Eurocode 7 and rock engineering: Current problems and future opportunities,
EUROCK2014: Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering-Structures on and in Rock Masses,
Vigo, Spain, Rotterdam, Balkema, 1531-1536.
He, M. (2014). Latest progress of soft rock mechanics and engineering in China, Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 6: 165-179.
He, M., Miao, J. & Feng, J. (2010). Rock burst process of limestone and its acoustic emission
characteristics under true-triaxial unloading conditions. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci, 47 (2):
286–298.
Heyman, J., 1972, Coulomb's Memoir on Statics: An Essay in the History of Civil Engineering.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Hudson, J.A. & Harrison, J.P. (2000). Engineering Rock Mechanics-An Introduction to the
Principles. 2nd ed., Amsterdam, Pergamon.
Hudson, J.A., Crouch, S.L. & Fairhurst, C. (1972). Soft, stiff and servo-controlled testing machines:
A review with reference to rock failure. Engineering Geology, 6: 155-189.
Irfan, T.Y. & Tang, K.Y. (1993). Effect of the coarse fraction on the shear strength of colluvium in
Hong Kong. Hong Kong Geotechnical Engineering Office, TN 4/92.
ISRM (1981) Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring, ISRM Suggested Methods. Brown,
E.T. (ed.), Oxford, Pergamon Press.
ISRM (2007). The Complete ISRM Suggested Methods for Rock Characterization, Testing and
Monitoring: 1974-2006. Ulusay, R. and Hudson, J.A. (eds.), Suggested Methods Prepared
by the Commission on Testing Methods, International Society for Rock Mechanics,
Compilation Arranged by the ISRM Turkish National Group, Ankara, Turkey.
ISRM (2015). The ISRM Suggested Methods for Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring:
2007-2014. Ulusay, R. (ed.), Suggested Methods Prepared by the Commission on Testing
Methods, International Society for Rock Mechanics, Heidelberg, Springer.
Jaeger, J.C. (1959). The frictional properties of joints in rock. Geofisica Pura e Applicata, 43 (Part 2):
148–158.
Jaeger, J.C. (1960). Shear fracture of anisotropic rocks. Geological Magazine, 97: 65–72.
John, K.W. (1962). An approach to rock mechanics. Journal of Soil Mechanics & Foundation
Division, ASCE, 88 (SM4): 1–30.
Kaiser, P.K. (2010) Practical implication of brittle failure on hard rock tunnelling construction.
[Online] Presentation at Universitat Politéchnicade Catalunya Barcelona, Spain, Available
from: www.etcg.upc.edu/estudis/aula-paymacotas/granit/ponencies/ kaiser.pdf [Accessed
7th February 2015].
21
Kanji, M. (2014). Critical issues in soft rocks, Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering, 6: 186-195.
Karman, T. von (1911). Festigkeitsversuche unter allseitigem. Druck. Z. Ver. Dtsch. Ing. 55: 1749-
1757.
King, L.V. (1912). On the limiting strength of rocks under conditions of stress existing in the earth's
interior. J. Geol., 20: 119- 138.
Kwasniewski, M. (2013). Recent advances in studies of the strength of rocks under true triaxial
compression conditions. Arch. Min. Sci., 58 (4): 1177–1200.
Kwasniewski., M, Takahashi, M. & Li, X. (2003). Volume changes in sandstone under true triaxial
compression conditions. In: 10th ISRM Congress, 2003. International Society for Rock
Mechanics.
Lee, H. & Haimson, B. (2011). True triaxial strength, deformability, and brittle failure of granodiorite
from the San Andreas fault observatory at depth. Int J Rock Mech Min, 48:1199–1207.
Li, X., Lia, Q.I. & He, J.M. (2004). In situ tests and stochastic structural model of rock and soil
aggregate in the three Gorges Reservoir area, China. Int. J Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 41 (3): 702-707.
Lindquist, E.S. (1994). The strength and deformation properties of mélange. PhD Dissertation,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, California.
Luong, M.P. & Emami, M. (2014). Characterization of mechanical damage in granite. Frattura ed
Integrità Strutturale, 27: 38-42.
Medley, E.W. (1994). The engineering characterization of melanges and similar block-in-matrix
rocks (bimrocks), PhD dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California at
Berkeley, California.
Medley, E.W. (2007). Bimrocks-Part 1: Introduction, Newsletter of HSSMGE, 7: 17-21
Medley, E.W. (2008). Engineering of the geological chaos of Franciscan and other bimrocks.
Proceedings of the 42nd US Rock Mechanics and 2nd Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, San
Francisco, Paper No. ARMA08-316.
Mogi, K. (1959). Experimental study of deformation and fracture of marble (1): On the fluctuation of
compressive strength of marble and relation to the rate of stress application. Bulletin of
Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 37: 155–170.
Mogi, K. (1977). Dilatancy of rocks under general triaxial stress state with special reference to
earthquake precursors. J Phys Earth, 25: S203–S217
Prendes-Gero, M.B., Suárez-Domínguez, F.J., González-Nicieza, C. & Álvarez-Fernández, M.I.
(2013). Infrared thermography methodology applied to detect localized rock falls in self-
VXSSRUWLQJXQGHUJURXQGPLQHV.ZDVQLHZVNL0 à\G]ED'HGV(852&.5RFN
Mechanics for Resources, Energy and Environment, Wroclaw, Poland, London, Taylor & Francis
Group, 825-829.
Rocha, M., Serafim, J.L,, Silveira, A. & Neto, J.R. (1955). Deformability of foundation rocks.
Proceedings of 5th Congress on Large Dams, Paris, R75, 3, 531–559.
Sato, A. & Aydan, Ö. (2014). An X-ray CT imaging of water absorption process of soft rocks.
Khalili, N., Russell, A. & Khoshghalb A. (eds.), Proceedings of International Symposium on
Unsaturated Soils: Research and Applications, 675-678.
Slob, S., Hack, H.R.G.K., van Knapen, B., Turner, K. & Kemeny, J. (2005). A method for automated
discontinuity analysis of rock slopes with three - dimensional laser scanning. In: Transportation
Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board1913, 187-194.
Sönmez, H., Kasapoglu, K.E., Coskun, A., Tunusluoglu, C., Medley, E.W. & Zimmerman, R.W.
(2009). A conceptual empirical approach for the overall strength of unwelded bimrocks. Vrkljan,
I (ed.), Rock Engineering in Difficult Ground Conditions, Soft Rock and Karst: Proceedings of
the ISRM Regional Symposium, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 357-360.
22
Takahashi, M. & Koide, H. (1989). Effect of the intermediate principal stress on strength and
deformation behavior of sedimentary rocks at the depth shallower than 2000 m. In: ISRM
International Symposium, 1989. International Society for Rock Mechanics
Timeshenko, S.P. (1953). History of Strength of Materials. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ulusay, R. & Aydan, Ö. (2011). Issues on short- and long-term stability of historical and modern
man-made cavities in the Cappadocia Region of Turkey, Proceedings of the 1st Asian and 9th
Iranian Tunnelling Symposium, Tehran [on CD].
Ulusay, R. & Gercek, H. (2016). Introductory longer review for rock mechanics testing methods, In:
Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, Vol. 2: Laboratory and Field Testing, Xia-Ting Feng
(ed.), Taylor & Francis, London, 1-66.
Ulusay, R., Aydan, Ö., Erguler, Z.A., Ngan-Tillard, D.J.M., Seiki, T., Verwaal, W., Sasaki, Y. &
Sato, A. (2014). ISRM Suggested Method for the needle penetration test. Rock Mech. and Rock
Eng., 47: 1073-1085.
Viggiani, G. & Hall, S.A. (2012) Full-field measurements in experimental geomechanics: Historical
perspective, current trends and recent results. In: Viggiani, A., Hall S.A., Romero, E. (eds.),
ALERT Doctoral School 2012: Advanced Experimental Techniques in Geomechanics, Dresden,
pp. 3-67.
Zhou, Y.X., Xia, K., Li, X.B., Li, H.B., Ma, G.W., Zhao, J., Zhou, Z.L. & Dai, F. (2012). Suggested
methods for determining the dynamic strength parameters and mode-I fracture toughness of rock
materials. Int. J Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 49: 105-112.
23
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.13(497.11)“2017/2019“
*5$Ĉ(9,16.$*(27(+1,.$865%,-,
2017 - 2019
Petar Anagnosti
GrDÿHYLQVNL)DNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWDX%HRJUDGX
REZIME
Sagledava se pojavno stanje u rešavanju problematike u oblasti Gradjevinske Geotehnike u
Srbiji u periodu 2017 – 2019 godine, sa osvrtom i na problem regulative u ovoj oblasti i
potrebne dopunske edukacije gradjevinskih inženjera tj njihovog osposobljavanja da
planiraju savremene postupke istraživanja terena i da koriste rezultate u skladu sa njihovom
DGHNYDWQRãüXXRGQRVXQDSULPHQMHQHSURUDþXQVNHSURFHGXUHGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMD.
./-8ý1(5(ý,*UDGMHYLQVND*HRWHKQLND(YURNRGRYL5HJXODWLYD
GEOTECHNICS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING IN

SERBIA 2017 – 2019
ABSTRACT
The appearances of Geotechnical activities in Civil Engineering Works in Serbia in last two
years has been described with particular attention paid to acting Codes and other Regulative
Documents in this field. The concern has been paid to promote better education for graduated
civil engineers that will enable the participation in planning of contemporary investigation
procedures and use of obtained results in conformity with applied numerical or analytical
computations.
KEYWORDS: Geotecnics in Civil Engineering, Eurocodes, Regulatory

documents.Education
UVOD
Opšti pregled nastanka i razvoja Gradjevinske Geotehnike (Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering) kako u svetu tako i na prostorima bivše Jugoslavije nakon I-og Svetskog Rata
prikazan je u mom saopšenju koji se nalazi u publikaciji : Zborniku radova sa II-RJQDXþQR
– VWUXþQRJVDYHWRYDQMD¶¶*HRWHKQLþNLDVSHNWLJUDGMHYLQDUVWYD¶¶RGUåDQRJX6oko Banji 2007
JRGLQHSDVHRYGHQHüHni pominjati. Izvesna dopuna navedenom ‚‚pregledu stanja stvari‚‚
MH XþLQMHQa L X PRP VDRSãWHQMX QD WUHüHP 6DYHWRYDQMX ÃÃ*HRWHKQLþNL DVSHNWL
Gradjevinarstva‚‚ održanom 2009 godine na Zlatiboru. I evo nas 2019 godine sa istom temom
24
i sa iskustvima iz proteklih 10 godina, ali bez ambicija da se pruži više od OLþQRJVD]QDQMDR

bitnim po struku dogadjanjima.
Od interesa je , naravno , rasmatrati barem okvirno i nepotpuno šta se dešava sa

problematikom Gradjevinske Geotehnike u Srbiji u najbližem proteklom vremenskom
SHULRGX L V WLP X YH]L GD VHEDUHP X SRNXãDMX QD]QDþH QHNL ¶¶problemi’’ ili ’’potrebe’’ o
kojima bi trebalo da se više razgovara pa eventualno i dela u narednom periodu.
U proteklom periodu od 2009 godine odvijale su se brojne aktivnosti u gradjevinarstvu Srbije,

SDVWLPXYH]LELELOHLDNWLYQRVWLXSRGUXþMX*UDGMHYLQVNH*HRWHKQLNHNDRQHL]EHåQRJGHOD
istraživanja, projektovanja i gradjenja široke skale gradjevinskih konstrukcija. Realizovali su
VH ]QDþDMQL REMHNWL X VWDPEHQRM L]JUDGQML WUåQLP FHQWULPD L X NDSLWDOQLP REMHNWLPD
SUYHQVWYHQRXL]JUDGQMLVDREUDüDMQLFD1HWUHEDL]RVWDYLWLLL]JUDGQMXQRYRJ$YDOVNRJWRUQMD
– NRPSOHWQRGHORQDãLKVWUXþQMDND U kooperaciji sa inostranim projektantskim firmama naši
VWUXþQMDFLsu imali XþHãüa u istraživanjima . naprimer : za fundiranje Mosta kod Beške, Mosta
na Adi i Pupinovog mosta preko Dunava, i objekata Beograda na Vodi. Za neke od ovih
objekata QDãLVWUXþQMDFLVXobavljali i zadatke stUXþQHNRQWUROHSURMHNDWDLQRVWUDQLKILUPLDX
manjoj meri obavljali saradnju na projektovanju.
Ono što svakako pobudjuje poseban interes jesu dešavanja u oblasti Gradjevinske geotehnike
na izgradnji autoputeva gde se uz nedovoljnu hvalu ili javno priznanje projektantima za
VDYUHPHQDWHKQLþNDUHãHQMDXYRGMHQMXWUDVHLSrojekte brojnih tunela, mostova i vijadukata ,
puna hvala se medjutim u javnosti iskazala izvršiocima navedenih projekata tj. L]YRGMDþLPD
– stranim firmama i njihovim GRPDüim podizvRGMDþLPD
,DNR MH VYLPD SR]QDWR GD VH ]QDWQR YLãH QDXüL QD ‚‚greškama‚‚ nego na ‚‚uspesima‚‚ ta
tematika nije dobila svoje mesto u saopštenjima na ovom savetovanju, i generalno skoro da
nema problematike iz oblasti Gradjevinske Geotehnike u putogradnji, tunelogradnji i sanaciji
pojava nestabilnosti delova terena – SRSXODUQRUHþHQRNOL]LãWD
Obim i sadržaj navedenih najkrupnijih objekata ipak nije doneo takvo angažovanje GRPDüLK
VWUXþQLKNDSDFLWHWD koje bi dovelo do osvajanje QRYLKVD]QDQMDL]QDþDMQLMHJXQDSUHGMLYDQMD
SRVWRMHüLK SR]QDWLK postupaka istraživanja terena i dimenzionisanja JHRWHKQLþNLK
konstrukcija.
8]LPDMXüL QDSUHG QDYHGHQR X RE]LU GDOMH L]ODJDQMH üH VH EDYLWL SRMHGLQLP VHJPHQWLPD
Gradjevinske Geotehnike , uz sYD SRVWRMHüD RJUDQLþHQMD X SRJOHGX LQIRUPLVDQRVWL DXWRUD
ovog teksta.
PRIMENA ISPITIVANJA I DEFINISANJA SVOJSTAVA TERENA
1DRYRPSRGUXþMX*UDGMHYLQVNH*HRWHKQLNHVHVXVWLþXDNWLYQRVWLviše geo- struka, i rezultati

tih aktivnosti daju doprinose formiranju ’’modela terena’’, i definisanja dejstava ili uticaja
koji se javljaju pri interakciji gradjevine sa sredinom ( terenom ) u kojem se ona formira.
Posebno se uvidja da i tehnološki proces izgradnMH NDR ãWR MH QDþLQ L ID]H LVNRSD L
25
podgradjivanja podzemnih objekta i dubokih iskopa otvorenih temeljnih jama ima uticaj na
’’modeliranje interakcije objekat – teren’’ u izgradnji i u eksploataciji.Ako se pri ovome ima
X YLGX XWLFDM RGQRVQR PRJXüQRVW SRjave vremenski uslovljenih dejstava na konstrukciju
(XGDUQD GHMVWYD YLEUDFLMH VHL]PLþND GHMVWYD ¶¶NULS¶¶ LOL ¶¶SX]DQMH¶¶ SUL VWDOQLP LOL
promenljivim naponskim stanjima, i dr. RQGD MH SULOLþQR MDVQR GD SURFHV LVSLWLYDQMD L
definisanja svojstava terena nije formalnost ili ’’šablonska aktivnost’’ koja se lako može u
potpuosti po svome sadržaju definisati propisima ili drugim ’’MHGQR]QDþQLP - standardnim’’
odredbama koje bi važile za svaku priliku.
Ipak se uvidja GD¶¶PHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYD¶¶NRMDVHXQRVHNDR ‚‚ulazni podaci‚‚ - inputi) u više

LOL PDQMH VRILVWLFLUDQH QXPHULþNH LOL DQDOLWLþNH SURUDþXQH QLVX ¶¶potpuno’’ konstantne
YHOLþLQHYHüGDYHRPD]DYLVHRGXVORYDRSWHUHüLYDQMDRG QDþLQDPRJXüHJ deformisanja, i
RG¶¶IL]LþNRJVWDQMD¶¶NDRãWRMHQDSU¶¶JXVWLQD¶¶VWHSHQ]DVLüHQMDYRGRP granulometrtijski
i mineraloški VDVWDY þYUVWH ID]H NRML GHILQLãX SRGORåQRVW QDSU ¶¶SURORPX WOD¶¶¶NRG OHVD
’’likvifakciji’’ kod granularnog tlaSDLSURPHQHXYHOLþLQLVXNFLMe kod prelaska iz nepotpune
]DVLüHQRVWLX]DVLüHQRVWDQMHNRKH]LYQRJWOD
Poslednjih godina i u širem okruženju i kod nas GRãORMHGRXþHVWDQHSULPHQHQDPHQVNLK

QHGHVWUXNWLYQLK SRVWXSDND LVWUDåLYDQMD WHUHQD NRULVWHüL WN]Y ¶¶JHR-IL]LþNH¶¶ SRVWXSNH
zasnovane na merenjima : EU]LQD ãLUHQMD HODVWLþQLK WDODVD HOHNWULþQRJ SRWHQFLMDOD, odraza
UDGUVNH SREXGH L GU 7DNYH VDYUHPHQH WHKQRORJLMH L RGJRYDUDMXüL XUHGMDML L PHUQR –
registraciona aparatura su postale dostupne i manjim firmama, ( koje imaju razvijen smisao
]D PDUNHWLQJ SD VH VXRþDDPR VD problemom svrsihodnosti pojedinih ovakvih merenja u
NRQNUHWQLPXVORYLPDWHUHQDLRþHNLYDQHLQWHUDNFLMHVDNRQVWUXNFLMRP.Ako uz to uzmemo u
obzir i nepotpuno saznanje i iskustvo o dometima pojedinih takvih postupakaþHVWR nastaje
SRSULOLþDQ ’’jaz’’ u razuPHYDQMXSRQXGMDþDLL]YUãLRFDSRMHGLQLKVSHFLMDOL]RYDQLKSRVWXSDND
merenja s jedne strane i korisnika rezultata tih merenja , jer ti rezultati VXYHüLQRP indirektni
pokazatelji potrebnih svojstava terena na osnovu kojih se vrši UHãDYDQMHQHNHJHRWHKQLþNH
problematike.
7DNR SRUHG NODVLþQLK SRVWXSDND LVSLWLYDQMD NRMD VH YUãH SRG QD]LYRP *HRPHKDQLþND
ispitivanja (Soil Mechanics testing) i ispitivanja Mehanike stena ( Rock Mechanics testing),
u ove GDQDV YHRPD þHVWR NRULãüHQe metode merenja spadaju Geo – VHL]PLþND *HR –
HOHNWULþQD*HR–radarska, Geo – magnetna , pa i Geo – daljinska (satelitska) merenja, prema
NRMLPDVHQDUD]QHQDþLQHLVDUD]OLþLWRPWDþQRãüX¶’zonira’’ teren . Ovakvo zoniranje se vrši
SUHPDL]PHUHQLPYHOLþLQDPDNRMHWHk treba ’’prevesti’’ na ona svojstva koja su potrebna za
rešavanje problema interakcije i dimenzionisanja konstrukcije, a koja se QDMþHãüH svode na
deformaciona svojstva þYUVWRüX L YRGRSURSXVWOMLYRVW D SRQHNDG XNOMXþH L UDVWYRUOMYRVW
disperzivnost, osetljvost na delovanje mraza i sl.
3RãWRPHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYDWODLVWHQDi kad se usvoje kao NRQVWDQWQHYHOLþLQH ustvari zavise

od naponskog stanja koje se dobija superpozicijom prirodnog stanja i onog koje stvaraju
naknadna prirodna i dejstva od konstrukcije, onda je razumljiva naglašena kompleksnost
RGUHGMLYDQMDUHOHYDQWQLK¶¶SURMHNWQLKYHOLþLQD¶¶ neophodnih PHKDQLþNLKNRQVWDQVWL koje su u
vezi sa primenom propisima utvrdjenih koeficijenata sigurnosti. Dešava se da ovim
26
kompleksnim uslovima QHSULGDMHRGJRYDUDMXüL ]QDþDMSDQHWDNRUHWNHKDYDULMVNHVLWXDFLMH

posebno pri iskopima temeljnih jama i dubokih useka ili zaseka, pokazuju da se pri izlasku
iz odredjenog nivoa ’’standardne sigurnosti’’ preterano XSURãüDYDQMH SUREOHPDWLNH
interakcije objekta i terena dovodi do negativnih posledica, koje se ne bi mogle olako
pripisivati ’’nepredvidljivim okolnostima’’ ili kompleksnosti terenskog stanja ( geološke
gradje ) NRMXQLMHPRJXüHVDJOHGDWLXSRWUHEQRMPHULXXVORYLPDUDVSRORåLYRJYUHPHQDL
resursa.
6GUXJHVWUDQHVDYUHPHQL¶¶VRIWYHUVNLSDNHWL¶¶]DQXPHULþNHDQDOL]HYUORþHVWR]DKWHYDMXGD
se u ’’inpute’’ unose i koeficijenti koji se teško ili nikako mogu odrediti u rutinskim bilo
terenskim ili laboratorijskim ispitivanjima, pogotovu u našim uslovima opremljenosti za
takva istraživanja. Medjutim potreba za takvim ‚‚koeficijentima‚‚ opet proizilaze iz
’’teorijskih modela XNRULãüHQLPVRIWYHULPD’’, koji opisuju ponašanje materijala u oblastima
elasto – SODVWLþQLKSDLnelinearnih veza napona i deformacija, ponašanja u stanju loma sa
„RMDþDQMLPDÃÃili ’’popuštanjima’’, ponašanjima koja su zavisna od vremena u kojem deluju
SRMHGLQDRSWHUHüHQMDLOLUDVWHUHüHQMDLVO.
1HXPROMLYD MH SULYODþQRVW SRSXODUQLK VRIWYHUVNLK SDNHWD NDR ãWR VX QDSU ÃÃ3+$6( ÃÃ L
‚‚PLAXIS‚‚ koji stalno nadogradjuju svoje proizvode savremenijim verzijama VWYDUDMXüL
XWLVDN GD VH L EH] SUYHQVWYHQR ORJLþNRJ SULVWXSD SUYR VKYDWDQMX SD RQGD L modeliranju
geotehnikog problema može kroz softversko uputstvo za primenu, rešiti SUDWLþQR svaki
problem interakcije konstrukcije i terena. Naravno na koricama ili prvim stranama Uputstava
za primenu stoji da se ti softveri primenju na punu odgovornost onog koji ih koristi.
Sve bi ovo trebalo da vodi ka shvatanju da racionalan pristup istraživanjima terena ( terenskih
, laboratorijskih, kabinetskihWUHEDGD]DSRþQHVDVDJOHGDYDQMHPNRPSOHNVQRVWLLVWLPXYH]L
QDþLQDUHãDYDQMDSUREOHPDLQWHUDNFLMHJUDGMHYina – teren tj od konstrukterske zamisli ’’rada
NRQVWUXNFLMH¶¶ SRG RþHNLYDQLP GHMVWYLPD D ]DWLP L RG UHDOQLK PRJXüQRVWL VD]QDYDQMD
potrebnih svojstava terena. Primera radi SULOLþQR je jasno da ’’ interakcija konstrukcije sa
terenom ’’ kao što je visoki dimnjak ili visoki rezervoar za vodu, nije isti kao za vertikalno
okno LGDXREDVOXþDMDELWDQXSOLY na sadržaj istraživanja terena ima i karakter ( geološka
gradja) terena gde se takva gradjevina planira.
Može se postaviti i pitanje da li se nastavnim programima na Gradjevinskim fakultetima u

Srbiji obezbedjuje GRYROMDQQLYRSR]QDYDQMD*HRWHKQLþNHSUREOHPDWLNH, posebno kada su u
pitanju postupci istraživanja komponenata geološke gradje i terena u celini i interpretacija
dobijenih saznanja.. Takodje je pitanje da li se Geološka problematika u dovoljnoj meri
savladava kao bi se postiglo razumevanje podataka koji se dobijaju geološkim istraživanjima
i njihovom interpretacijom.
,QåHQMHUL JUDGMHYLQVNH VWUXNH VH þHVWR QH RVHüDMX GRYROMQR NRPSHWHQWQLPD GD NULWLþNL
rasmatraju podatke koji se dobijaju geološkim istraživanjima, i shodno tome da kompetentno
XWLþXQDVPHURYHLVWUDåLYDQMDNRMDVXELWQD]DIRUPLUDQMHUDþXQVNRJPRGHODLQWHUDNFLMHWHUHQD
i konstrukcije.
27
U situaciji kakva je danas treba prihvatiti da EH]GRSXQVNRJ¶¶XþHQMD¶¶L nakon dobijanja

GLSORPH SD L OLFHQFH QHüH VH ODNR SHYD]LOD]LWL YHü SRPHQXWL ¶¶MD]¶¶ X UD]XPHYDQMX L
VYUVLVKRGQRP NRULãüHQMX SRVWXSDND LVWUDåLYDQMD WHUHQD NRML VH ¶¶QXGH QD WUåLãWX¶¶ 2YR MH
SRVHEQR RVHWOMLYR X VOXþDMu kada se radi o realizaciji složenijih objekata i X VOXþDMX
nepovoljnih WHUHQVNLKXVORYDNDRãWRVXIRVLOQDNOL]LãWDPRþYDUQLWHUHQLOHVQDWOD podložna
’’prolomu’’, terena sa velikim promenama u nivoima podzemne vode i dr.
Rana identifikacija kompleksnosti interakcije objekta i terena i nepovoljnih terenskih uslova

WUHEDGDVHRVWYDUXMHNUR]VDUDGQMXVDVWUXþQMDFLPD*HRORãNLKVWUXNDNRMLPDMH]QDWQREOLåD
problematika koja je vezana za genezu pojedinihh delova terena, terena u celini i prirodnih
uticaja i procesa (sezonskih, sukcesivnih divergentnih ili konvrgentnih i dr.) usled kojih su
se pojedini delovi terena formirali7RWUHEDGDXWLþHQD QDþLQ detaljnijeg istraživanja u zoni
terena koja je u interakciji sa konstrukcijom. Razumevanje tih procesa od strane konstruktera
, posebno njihov upliv u sadašnjoj terenskoj konfiguraciji, klimi i lokalnoj ljudskoj delatnosti,
takodje je neophodan preduslov za preduzimanje adekvatnih terenskih i laboratorijskih
istraživanja.
S tim u vezi je korisno ]D*HRWHKQLþNXSUREOHPDWLNXQDYHVWL Evrokod EC 7 koji se sukcesivno

publikuje na srpskom jeziku od strane Instituta za Standardizaciju Republike Srbije, u kojem
je kompleksnost problema interakcije gradjevine i terena razrešena kroz ¶¶ *HRWHKQLþNX
kategorizaciju’’. Ta kategorizacija se YUãLSRþHYRG jednostavne problematike koja se rešava
SULPDUQR QD SRVWRMHüHP LVNXVWYX L SUHWKRGQR L]YUãHQLP LVWUDåLYDQMLPD X RNROLQL EXGXüHJ
objekta, preko rutinske problematike za koju je Evrokod EC 7 propisao niz pravila i principa
za formiranje fonda podataka o terenu kao prvog koraka a zatim za izradu interpretacije tih
SRGDWDNDX]XSRUHGMLYDQMHVDSUHWKRGQLPVOLþQLPWHUHQVNLPXVORYima gde su bila izvršena
VOLþQDLVSLWLYDQMDLLVWUDåLYDQMDVYRMVWDYDWHUHQDSDGRNRPSOHNVQHSUREOHPDWLNHJGHRGUHGEH
Evrokoda EC7 jesu potrebne ali ne moraju da budu i dovoljne za formiranje adekvatnog
]QDQMDRPRJXüRMLQWHUDNFLMLREMHNWDLWHUHQD
U oNYLUX ¶¶XRELþDMHQLK¶¶ SRVWXSDND LVWUDåLYDQMD WHUHQD ]DVQRYDQLK QD SRVWXSFLPD

¶¶VWUXNWXUQRJEXãHQMD¶¶X]X]LPDQMHX]RUDNDL]VUåQHFHYLQDMüHãüHURWLUDMXüHVWDQMHVHNRG
QDV SUDNWLþQR QH PHQMD SD VH X]RUDN uzet istiskivanjem iz sržne cevi smatra
’’’nepoUHPHüHQLPX]RUNRP¶¶LDNRVH]QDGDWDNDYX]RUDNX]HWL]WODPHNHNRQ]LVWHQFLMHELYD
]ELMHQLMLQHJRXSULURGQRPVWDQMXDX]RUDNX]HWL]WODWYUGHNRQ]LVWHQFLMHELYDSRUHPHüHQLML
u odnosu na prirodno stanje.To naravno otvara prostor dopunskim ’’interpretacijama’’
NRMLPD VH GRELMHQL UH]XOWDWL LVSLWLYDQMD GHIRUPDELOQRVWL L þYUVWRüH ¶¶XVDJODãDYDMX¶¶¶VD
RþHNLYDQLPYUHGQRVWLPDSR]QDWLPL]SUHWKRGQRJLVNXVWYDLOLOLWHUDWXUH.DRVWYDUDQL]X]HWDN
VHPRåHQDYHVWLL]UDGDLVWUDåQLKRNDQDVYHWORJSUHþQLNDPGXELQHdo 20m na prostoru
WHPHOMD SRVWRMHüHJ L QRYRJ PRVWD NRG %HãNH QD GHVQRM REDOL 'XQDYD 2YLP RNQLPD MH
ostvaren neposredni uvid u fosilne klizne površine na UD]OLþLWLP dubinama sa njihovom
RULMHQWDFLMRPXSURVWRUXLVDPRJXüQRãüXGDVH¶¶LVHNX¶¶¶QHSRUHPHüHQL uzorci i onda ispita
otpornost na smicanje u smeru tragova pomeranja na toj površini. Korisno je napomenuti da
VX¶¶YUãQH¶¶YUHGQRVWLRWSRUQRVWLQDVPLFDQMHGXåWUDJRYDVPLFDQMDELOHYHüHRGUH]LGXDOQLK
vrednosti, što ukazuje da ’’automatska’’ primena rezLGXDOQH þYUVWRüH GXå IRVLOQLK NOL]QLK
površina ne mora da bude ispravna. U brojnim bušotinama koje su u raznim periodima
28
L]YUãHQH QD WRP WHUHQX X ¶¶MH]JULPD¶¶ L] VUåQH FHYL QLVX VH PRJOH XRþLWL NOL]QH SRYUãLQH
utvrdjene oknima, a obzirom na visok indeks konzistencije ( oko 1,00 ) utiskivanje
WDQNR]LGQRJFLOLGUDQLMHVHPRJORVSURYHVWLEH]SRUHPHüDMDX]RUND
PRAKSA I OKO PRAKSE
Dešavanja u praksi koja su zaokupljala pažnju su više bila ona koja pi spadala u ‚‚neuspehe‚‚
JGH VX VH MDYOMDOH SRMDYH NDR ãWR VX ]QDWQR YHüD SRPHUDQMD RG GR]YROMHQLK SD L UXãHQMD
L]YUãHQLK LVNRSD ]D WHPHOMHQMH RELþQLK VWPEHQLK REMHNDWD DOL L YHü L]YHGHQLK SRWSRUQLK
objekata. Brojni su primeri u kojima se projektna dokumentacija za iskope i osiguranje
stabilnosti tih iskopa pokaže neadekvatnom u odnosu na stvarno ‚‚stanje u terenu‚‚ ali i da se
SURFHGXUD L]YUãHQMD LVNRSD L RVLJXUDQMD VWDELOQRVWL WRNRP LVNRSD SRNDåH NDR X]URþQLN
navedenim ‚‚neuspesima‚‚7RELXSXüLYDORQDWRGDVXVHYHüSULL]YUãHQMXLVWUDåQLKUDGRYD
odstupilo od adekvatnog obima i vrsta istražnih radnji ( terenskih, laboratorijskih), i kroz
ÃÃNDELQHWVNLÃÃUDGVXNFHVLYQRJSUDüHQMDSRVWLJQXWLKsaznanja, i prilagodjavanju sukcesivnih
istražnih radnji tim saznanjima i razjašnajvanju stanja terena kao temeljnog tla ili prostora u
kojem se vrše iskopi i nakon toga formiraju podzemne ili nadzemne gradjevine.
Nije nepoznato, barem ‚‚u principu‚‚ da QDþLQRPL]YRGMHQMDJUDGMHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMDNDG

je u pitanju fundiranje ili podzemna konstrukcija ( šaht, tunel i dr.) može kompromitovati
WHKQLþNRUHãHQMHNRMHQLMHSULPHUHQRL]YHGHQRPQDþLQXL]YRGMHQMD7DNYDRJUDQLþHQMDþDN
NDGVHLSRVWDYHQDSUXREOLNXUDGDXNDPSDGDPDQDL]PHQLþQRQDGRYROMQRMudaljenosti, ili
u obliku dozvoljenog rada u ‚‚sušnom periodu‚‚ili se ignorišu ‚‚kao preterano sigurna‚‚ ili se
ne sprovode iz razloga postavljenih rokova i odvijanja radova u svim vremenskim uslovima.
3RVWRMH L VOXþDMHYL NDGD VH SULOLNRP GRVWL]DQMD LVNRSom nivoa projektovanog temeljenja
konstatuje pa se zanemari ili i ne konstatuje razlika u pogledu projektom predvidjenog
kvaliteta ili stanja materijala u temeljnoj spojnici i po dubini terena, a pristupi izvodjenju
gradjevine. Nakon toga je samo sretan slXþDMGDVHQHSRNDåXSRVOHGLFHWDNYRJGHODQMDDYUOR
þHVWRVHWRLSRNDåHNUR]QHSULKYDWOMLYDSRPHUDQMDSDLRãWHüHQMDQDNRQVWUXNFLML
9HRPDUD]OLþLWHYDULMDQWHQHXYLGMDQMDLOLLJQRULVDQMDUD]OLNDXSRJOHGXSURMHNWRPGHILQLVDQLK
uslova u pogledu iskopa ili temeljnog tla su se manifestovale prilikom izgradnje novih
VDREUDüDMQLFDX6UELMLXSURWHNOHGYHJRGLQHãWRMHYRGLORNDSURGXåHQMXURNRYDJUDGMHQMDSD
L]QDþDMQRJSRYHüDQMDWURãNRYDJUDGMHQMD
Zato bi mogli da kažemo : dok je prikazivanje u saopštenjima ‚‚uspešnih‚‚ realizacija

JHRWHKQLþNLK JUDGMHYLQD QHVXPQMLYR NRULVQR L SRWUHEQR QLãWD PDQMH QLMH NRULVQR L
SULND]LYDQMHÃÃQHXVSHãQLKÃÃGRJDGMDQMDNRMDVXVHGHãDYDODQDMþHãüHL]SUHWKRGQRQDYHGHQLK
razloga. Ovo poslednje na ovom savetovanju skoro da nije bilo zastupljeno.
PROPISI I STANDARDI
3RVWRMHüLYDåHüLWHKQLþNLQRUPDWLYL koji su publikovani kao propisi, i kao standardi za

terenska i laboratorijska ispitivanja XYHüLQL SRWLþXL]SHULRGDSUH2000 – te godine i nadalje
29
služe kao jedina GRPDüDWHKQLþND regulativa iz oblasti Gradjevinske Geotehnike. Novina je

GDVHVWDQGDUGLQHVPDWUDMXREDYH]QLPLGDVHPRUDMXXSURMHNWQRMWHKQLþNRMGRNXPHQWDFLML
precizno definisati, a nose nove oznake koje im je dodelio Institut za Standardizaciju Srbije.
U pripremi je ‚‚sveobuhvatni‚‚ Pravilnik za gradjevinske konstrukcije, kojim bi bilo

UHJXOLVDQRLSURMHNWRYDQMH*HRWHKQLþNLKNRQVWXNFLMD– tj primena Evrokoda 7. EVROKOD-
EC 7 pruža znatno širu regulatornu osnovu jer sadri i pravila i principe za dimenzionisanje
široke skale konstrukcija u oblasti Gradjevinske Geotehnike, kao što su potporni zidovi,
priboji, plitko i dubinsko temljenje, šipovi, sidra , nasipi i dr. Pored toga definisan je i sistem
NRQWUROHNYDOLWHWDL]UDGHQDþLQGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMDNUR]SURFHVRSVHUYDFLMHSRQDãDQMDXWRNX
JUDGMHQMDQDþLQL]ERUDSURMHNWQLKSDUDPHWDUDNRMLPDVXGHILQLVDQDVYRMVWYDWODLGU
Nesumnjivi su koristi od EVROKODOVA kao jedinstvenog sLVWHPDGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMDSRþHY

od odredjivanja dejstava – RSWHUHüHQMDGR definisanja pravila i principa na kojima treba da
se zasniva koncepcija konstrukcije i njenog izvodjenja, pri tome dopunjeni Nacionalnim
Prilozima u kojima se preciziraju koeficijenti VLJXUQRVWL]DSRMHGLQDJUDQLþQDVWDQMDORPDLOL
XSRWUHEOMLYRVWL=QDþDMRYLh Nacionalnih Priloga MHXWRPHãWRVHSRMHGLQLREOLFLRSWHUHüHQMD
MDYOMDMXXYHRPDUD]OLþLWLPREOLFLPDLLQWHQ]LWHWLPD u pojedinim zemljama Evropske Unije.
Tako napr. za zemljotreVQH XWLFDMH X 1HPDþNRM YLVLQD NRHILFLMHQDWD VLJXUQRVWL QHPD LVWL
]QDþDMNDRX*UþNRMWMX1HPþDNRMVHPRJXRGDEUDWLWLNRHILFLMHQWL]QDWQRYHüLEH]GDLPDMX
XWLFDMQDGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMHSRMHGLQLKREMHNDWDQDSUPRVWRYDGRNMHWRX*UþNRMVDVYLPGUXJL
VOXþDMDVOLþQRMHLVDRSWHUHüHQMLPDRGYHWURYDSRSODYD i dr. Ovo slikovito pokazuje da je
izrada Nacionalnih Priloga NDR SUDWHüLK GRNXPHQDWD jednako važna kao i primena Opštih
pravila za projektovanje i dimenzionisanje
ST58ý1$29/$âû(1-$,ODGOVORNOST
Nakon ustanovljenja Inženjerske Komore i pošto su se formirale licence kao zakonski okvir
za preuzimanje VWUXþQHodgovornosti u izvršenju pojedinih aktivnosti, postavilo se pitanje da
li opisi poslova za koje se izdaju licence uvek RGJRYDUDMX¶¶VWUXþQRMRVSRVREOMHQRVWL¶¶RQLK
koji te licence dobijaju.
8SRGUXþMX*UDGMHYLQVNH*HRWHKQLNHGDNOHQHL]DREODVW*HRWHKQLNHX5XGDUVWYXOLFHQFH

se izdaju kao i za ostale oblasti gradjevinarstva za ’’projektante tj za projektovanje ’’ i za
¶¶L]YRGMDþH WM ]D L]YRGMHQMH UDGRYD¶¶ /LFHQFH VH QH L]GDMX ]D QDXþQH DNWLYQRVWL ]D
istraživDþNH DNWLYQRVWL L VOLþQH VWXGLMVNH UDGRYH NRML VH LSDN MDYOMDMX NDR VDVWDYQL GHR
’’podloga’’ za projektovanje, a ponekad i za izvodjenje, NDGD VH SURXþDYDMX VSHFLILþQH
tehnologije, alati, vezivni materijali i sl.
Ova osnovna podela je prisutna i u Evrokodu 7 gde se jasno izdvaja proces izvršenja istražnih
radnji i izrade ’’faktografskog izveštaja’’ sa rezultatima merenja koja se vrše u skladu sa
SRVWRMHüLPVWDQGDUGQLPSURFHGXUDPDLOLSURFHGXUDPDNRMHVXSURSLVDQHSRVHEQLPWHKQLþNLP
XVORYLPD GHILQLVDQLP X XJRYRUX ]D L]YUãHQMH WLK UDGRYD L QD WDM QDþLQ VH IRUPLUDMX
’’podloge’’ ( prethodne radnje ) na osnovu kojih se onda sprovodi procedura projektovanja
tj dimenzionisanja konstrukcije.
30
U proceduru projektovanja se po pravilu XNOMXþXMH SODQLUDQMH LOL SURJUDPLUDQMH LVWUDåQLK

aktivnosti , pa na osnovu dobijenih rezultata ustanovljavanje ’’referentnih parametara’’ a na
osnovu njih ’’ projektnih parametara’’ kojima se definišu svojstva tla ili stena koja su
SRWUHEQD]DVSURYRGMHQMHDQDOLWLþNHLOLQXPHULþNHSURFHGXUHGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMD2YLSDUDPHWUL
se odredjuju ’’zonalno’’ tj za pojedine delove prostora tj terena koji se nalazi u interakciji sa
konstrukcijom. Sve ovo naravno se prilagodjava ¶¶QLYRX WHKQLþNH UD]UDGH¶¶ RG SODQVNLK
GRNXPHQWDWD SUHNR JHQHUDOQLK L LGHMQLK SURMHNDWD GR JODYQLK SURMHNDWD L NRQDþQR GR
dokumentacije po kojoj se vrši izvodjenje.
*GHVXRQGDPRJXüLQHVSRUD]XPLXSRJOHGXRGJRYRUQRVWL]DXVYRMHQHLNRQDþQRL]YHGHQH
dimenzije jedne gradjevinske konstrukcije. Problem leži u tome da su usko-VWUXþQH
specijalizacije ’’odvojile’’ delove ’’projektovanja’’do te mere, da se aktivnosti koje su
YH]DQH]DSULPHQXDQDOLWLþNHLOLQXPHULþNHSURFHGXUHdimenzionisanja mogu da svedu na
popunjavanje liste ulaznih podataka koja se traži u nekom konkretnom postupku
dimenzionisanja, bez da se analizira QMLKRYDYHOLþLQDNRMDRSHWGDMHUH]XOWDWNRMLQHPRUDGD
bude prihvatljiv sa stanovišta inženjerske logike. Tu postoji uzdržljivost inženjera
JUDGMHYLQVNH VWUXNH GD QD ELOR NRML QDþLQ XWLþX QD JHRORãND LVWUDåLYDQMD WHUHQD UDGLMH VH
SULKYDWDMX JRWRYL SULND]L JHRORãNH JUDGMH SD L YUHGQRVWL PHKDQLþNLK SDUDQHWDUD SRMHGLK
delova te gradje. S druge strane postoji ‚‚iQVWLWXWÃÃWMþHVWDSUDNVDL]UDGHJHRORãNLKSUHSRUXND
NRMHJHRWHKQLþNHNRQVWUXNFLMHWUHEDGDVHUHDOL]XMXXNRQNUHWQRMWHUHQVNRMVLWXDFLMLDNRMHVH
ne zasnivaju na tehno-ekonomskoj analizi varijantnih rešenja.
3RVWRMHXWHKQLþNRMGRNXPHQWDFLMLþDN i ’’izjave’’ projektanata – ¶¶VWDWLþDUD¶¶GDVHSURUDþXQ

zasniva na podacima o terenu ]D NRMH ¶¶VWDWLþDU¶¶ QH RGJRYDUD X SRJOHGX WDþQRVWL L
primenljivosti. Zatim, ukoliko je postupak dimenzionisanja ’’savremeniji’’ on sadrži
parametre poþHWQRJ QDSRQVNRJ VWDQMD JHRORãNRJ D RQGD L ponašanja tla ili stena za
nelinearne odnose napona i deformacija, u uslovima ‚‚idealno – SODVWLþQRJÃÃSRQDãDQMDLOLza
fazu ’’popuštanja’’ ili ‚‚RMDþDYDQMDÃÃ tj. promenljive parametre u odnosu na naponsko stanje,
ali i na vremensku dimeziju kroz konvergentno ili divergentno kvazi viskozno ponašanje
(tj.’’krip’’).. S druge strane prilikom planiranja istražnih procedura, obima i rasporeda u
SURVWRUX UHWNR VH SROD]L RG WRJD NRMLP üH SURFHGXUDPD ELWL YUãHQR GLPHQ]ionisanje
konstrukcije, pa da se u skladu s tim vrši izbor postupaka istraživanja. Vrlo retko se postupci
istraživanja planiraju i vrše tako da se rezultati pojedinih vrsta istraživanja’’ukrštaju’’ kako
bi se izbegle ili ispravile nedovoljnosti samo jednog QDþLQDLVSLWLYDQMDVYRMVWDYDWODLVWHQDD
prisutan je i faktor kratkih rokova i smanjivanja troškova, koji þHVWRNDVQLMHSRVWDMHX]URNL
NDãQMHQMDLSRYHüDQLKWURãNRYDJUDGMHQMD
Kao polazna osnova za prevazilaženje ovih problema treba uzeti u obzir nagovešten Pravilnik
za gradjevinske konstrukcije prema kome XþODQXVWRML ÃÃ*HRWHKQLþNHSRGDWNH bira i
utvrdjuje odgovorni projektant LQWHUSUHWDFLMRPUH]XOWDWDJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåQLUDGRYDLGUXJLK
istražnih radova i podloga ‚‚ kao i ‚‚ 2FHQXYUVWHRELPDLSULPHUHQRVWLJHRWHKQLþNLKLGUXJLK
istraživanja . . . GDMHRGJRYRUQLSURMHNDQWXVNORSXJHRWHKQLþNRJSURMHNWRYDQMDÃÃ .DNRüHVH
ovo odraziti na dosada praktikovan ‚‚timski rad‚‚ u izradi projektne dokumentacije, gde su
odgovornosti bile nedovoljno definisane, posebno kada je u pitanju geološka problematika i
31
VKRGQR WRPH L]YUãHQD LVWUDåLYDQMD WHUHQD NDR RVQRYD ]D JHRWHKQLþNX LQWHUSUHWDFLMX WM ]D
IRUPLUDQMHUDþXQVNRJPRGHODLQWHUDNFLMHWHUHQDLNRQVWrukcije, i dimenzinisanje te kostrkcije,
ELüHSRWUHEQRi vreme da se to razjasni.
Ovim zakonskim rešenjem ( Pravilnikom za gradjevinske konstrukcije) bi trebalo da bude

jasno postavljena nadležnost a time i odgovornost onih na kojima je da definišu‚ potrebne
SRGDWNHRWHUHQXGDRJUDQLþe upotrebu tih podataka na one procedure dimenzionisanja za
koje su ti podaci primenljivi, odnosno da korisnik podataka o terenu mora da ima
odgovornost da podatke primenjuje svrsishodQR QMLKRYRP QDþLQX RGUHGMLYDQMD L
kompatibilnosti sa procedurom dimenzionisanja. Licence ( ako se budu menjale na osnovu
novg Pravilnika ) bi u ovom smislu morale da budu veoma precizne i da predvide
odgovornost kako za definisanje sastava - gradje terena i svojstava þODQRYDJHRORãNHJUDGMH
tako i odgovornost za ocenu njihove adekvatnosti pa onda za primenu tih podataka u
postupcima dimenzionisanja. 1H]DYLVQR RG QDYHGHQRJ L VDGDãQMH VWDQMH EL SUHSRUXþLYDOR
dopunsku edukaciju QDJHRWHKQLþNRMSUREOHPDWLFL koja se danas, po pravilu, ne dobija na 7-
om stepenu Univerzitetskog obrazovanja u Srbiji, ali bi ipak trebalo da SRVWRMLPRJXüQRVWGD
se takva edukacija ostvaruje na magistarskim studijama kod kandidata koji rade magistarski
rad iz oblasti gradjevinske geotehnike.
=$./-8ý1$5$=0$75$1-$
*UDGMHYLQVND*HRWHKQLNDSUHVWDYOMDGHODWQRVWNRMDXNOMXþXMHVMHGQHVWUDQHNRQVWUXNWHUDNDR
autora gradjevine, a s druge strane izvršioce istraživanja zone terena kao sastavnog dela
NRQVWUXNFLMHVDNRMRPMHXLQWHUDNFLML1DSUHGDNXPRJXüQRVWLPD¶¶PRGHOLUDnja’’ navedene
LQWHUDNFLMHLGLYHUVLILNDFLMDSRVWXSDNDLVWUDåLYDQMDWHUHQDþHVWRQLVXPHGMXVREQRXVNODGMHQL
SRJRWRYX NDGD VH WHåL SULPHQL YHRPD VRILVWLFLUDQLK SURUDþXQVNLK SRVWXSDND NRML WUHEDGD
donose uštede u konstrukciji u odnosu na jednostavnije ’’modeliranje’’.
Prevazilaženje navedenog ’’jaza’’L]PHGMX ]DKWHYQLK VRILVWLFLUDQLK VRIWYHUD L PRJXüQRVWL

dobijanja uverljivih vrednosti parametara koji se u tim softverima traže je ozbiljan zadatak
gradjevinske geotehnike kod nas koji bi se mogao ostvariti kroz usmerenu dodatnu edukaciju
kojom bi se izvršilo upoznavanje sa savremenim postupcima istraživanja terena i sa
dometima koji se mogu ostvariti u pogledu dobijanja potrebnih parametara ponašanja
prirodnih materijala. Nagovešteno preciznije definisanje odgovornosti u pogledu od
programiranja pa SUHNRSUDüHQMD izvršenja istražnih radnji , interpretacije rezultata i NRQDþQR
QMLKRYHSULPHQHXSRVWXSFLPDGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMDJUDGMHYLQVNLKJHRWHKQLþNLKNRQVWUXNFLMD, bi
bio požekljan put da se ostvari navedena odgovornost.
Jedna od aktivnosti 6USVNRJGUXãWYD]DPHKDQLNXWODLJHRWHKQLþNRLQåHQMHUVWYRELmogla da

bude u inicijativama ( napr. prema Inženjerskoj komori ) da se pokenu programi usavršavanja
JUDGMHYLQVNLK LQåHQMHUD NRML åHOH GD VH RULMHQWLãX QD JHRWHKQLþNX SUREOHPDWLNX L WR
usavršavanja ne samo ]D VDYODGDYDQMH SRMHGLQLK QXPHULþNLK SRVWXSDND L VRILVWLFLUDQLK
modela ponašanja tla i stenaYHüSUHVYHJDQDSRWSXQLMHVD]QDvanje postupaka kako terenskih
WDNRLODERUDWRULMVNLKLVWUDåLYDQMDLSRVWRMHüLKRJUDQLþHQMDXSULPHQOMYRVWLUH]XOWDWDNRMLVH
dobijaju tim istraživanjima
32
LITERATURA
0LQLVWDUVWYRJUDGHYLQDUVWYDVDREUDüDMDLLQIUDVWUXNWXUH3UHGORJ3UDYLOQLND]DJUDGMHYLQVNH
konstrukcije.Beograd 2019g.
Designers Guide to EN 1997-1. Thomas Telford Publishiong. 2007g.
(1(YURNRG2VQRYHSURUDþXQDNRQVWUXNFLMDGradjevinski fakultet Beograd 2006g.
EN 1997-1: 2004. Evrokod 7 GeotHKQLþNL3URUDþXQL'HR2SãUD Pravila. Gradjevinski fakultet
Beograd 2009g.
33
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.191(497.4)
POSEBNI USLOVI GRADNJE TUNELA U

.$56781$35,0(58ä(/(=1,ý.(358*(
',9$ý$-KOPER
Vojkan -RYLþLü*, Jože Ratej*, Joerg Prestor**

* IRGO,,QãWLWX]DUXGDUVWYRJHRWHKQRORJLMRLQRNROMH6ORYHQþHYD
Ljubljana, Slovenija, vojkan.jovicic@irgo.si; jote.ratej@irgo.si
** Geološki zavod Slovenije, 'LPLþHYDXOLFD/MXEOMDQD, Slovenija,
joerg.prestor@geo-zs.si
REZIME
1RYD åHOH]QLþND OLQLMD L]PHÿX 'LYDþH L .RSUD WHþH NUR] ]RQX NDUVWD NRMX SRYH]XMHPR VD
velikim reverznim prelomom na kontaktu istarskog poluostrva i spoljašnih Dinarida, koji je
SR]QDWNDR.UDãNL5XE=ERJPYHOLNHYLVLQVNHUD]OLNHL]PHÿX'LYDþHL.RSUD, koju
treba savaladati na maloj razdaljini, YHOLNDYHüLQDWUDVHWHþHSRG]HPQR1DWUDVLVHSRWHåLQL
izdvajaju dva tunela, približne dužine od 6 do 7 km, koja se nalaze u zoni izrazite
karstifikacije stenske mase i u posebnim hidrogeološkim uslovima8þODQNXVXSUHGVWDYOMHQL
YRGHüL SULQFLSL ]D JUDGnju tunela u okruženju karsta kao i generalna rešenja za iskop i
primarno podiranje tunela QDSULPHUXSUXJH'LYDþD-Koper.
./-8ý1(5(ý,karst, geologija, hidrogeologija, gradnja tunela, projektovanje, TBM,

NATM
PARTICULAR CONDITIONS FOR TUNNEL

CONSTRUCTION IN KARST: EXAMPLE OF
',9$ý$-KOPER RAILWAY
ABSTRACT
1HZ'LYDþD-Koper railway runs through the karst area associated with the major thrust fault
on the contact between Istra peninsula and outer Dinarides, which is known as the Karst Edge.
'XHWRVRPHPKLJKGLIIHUHQFHLQDOWLWXGHEHWZHHQ'LYDþDDQG.RSHU, which must be
overcome at a short distance, most of the railway line runs underground. On the route two six
to seven kilometres long tunnels, which are both within the heavily karstified rock, are the
most demanding structures. The main governing principles for tunnelling in karst are
presented and some general solutions for tunnel excavation and support on the example of
'LYDþD-Koper line are given in the paper.
KEY WORDS: karst, geology, hydrogeology, tunnelling, design, TBM, NATM

34
UVOD
1RYD åHOH]QLND SUXJD 'LYDþD-Koper SRYH]XMH OXNX .RSHU X 6ORYHQLML VD GLVSHþHUVNim i
logLVWLþQLPFHQWURP X'LYDþL. Trasa, prikazana na slici 1MHGXJDþNDNP i prevazilazi
približno 400 m visinske razlike L]PHÿX NDUVWQRJ SODWRD L QLYRD PRUD X UHODWLYQR WHãNLP
JHRORãNLPXVORYLPD=DKWHYDQLPDNVLPDOQLQDJLEWUDVHRGGLNWLUDGDMHSUDNWLþQR
trase ispod zemlje. Na trasi se nalaze ukupno 8 tunela od kojih su tri u kategoriji dugih tunela
i dva viadukta u skupnoj dužini od cca 1400m.
6OLND7UDVDGUXJRJWLUD'LYDþD-.RSHUVDSULSDGDMXüLPREMHNWLPD (tuneli T1 –T8 isprekidana plava

linija, viadukti V1-V2 puna plava linija, pristupni putevi- crvene linije). izvor:
http://www.drugitir.si/trasa-drugega-tira
Figure 1 Route of WKH6HFRQG7UDFN'LYDþD-Koper with belonging structures (tunnels T1 –T8 broken
blue lines, viaducts V1-V2 full blue lines, approaching roads-red lines). Source:
http://www.drugitir.si/trasa-drugega-tira
U gornjem, severnom delu trasa WHþHNUR]]RQXNDUVWDNRMXSRYH]XMHPRVDYHOLNLPUHYHU]QLP

prelomom na kontaktu istarskog poluostrva i spoljašnih Dinarida, koji je poznat kao Kraški
Rub LNRMLSUHGVWDYOMDIL]LþQXJUDQLFXL]PHÿXNUDþQMDþNHLIOLãQHJHRORãNHVHNYHQFH. Svakako
35
QDMYHüLL]D]RYJUDGQMHåHOH]QLþNHSUXJHVXGYDWXQHOD7(dug 6,7 km) i T2 (dug 6,0 km)

koja teku kroz izrazito karstificiranu stensku masu. Tuneli T3 do T8, locirani zapadno od
Kraškog Ruba, se nalaze u flišu i po svojoj zahtevnosti su MHGQRVWDYQLML ]D L]YRÿHQMH od
tunela u karstu.
9RGHüLSULPHULSURMHNWQLKUHãHQMDza tunele u karstu su prikazani na primeru tunela T1, pri
þHPXVXLVWDLOLVOLþQDUHãHQMDSULPHQMHQDQDWXQHOX7'56, Tunel T1 je dvojni
tunel, koji ima glavnu, transportnu cev dužine 6727 m i servisnu cev dužine 6683 m. Servisna
FHYVHNRULVWL]DVSDãDYDQMHOMXGLXVOXþDMXQHVUHüHLWDNRMHRSUHPOMHQDGDRPRJXüDYDGRVWXS
YR]LOLPD]DVSDãDYDQMHNDRLGDSRPDåHYHQWLODFLMLJODYQHFHYLXVOXþDMXSRåDUD%H]RE]LUD
QDQMLKRYHUD]OLþLWHIXQNFLMHREHFHYLLPDMXLGHQWLþDQNDUDNWHULVWLþQLSRSUHþQLSUHVHNNRML
iznosi približno 70 m2 svetlog otvora, to je širine od 6,86 m i visine od 7,00 m. Uzduž tunela
T1 se na približno svakih 500 m nalaze trinaest SRSUHþQih veza L]PHÿXJODYQHLVHUYLVQHFHYL
3RSUHþQHYH]HVXSURMHNWRYDQHWDNRGDRPRJXüHHYDNXDFLMXOMXGL iz transportne u servisnu
cev, da obezbede jednakomerno napajanje uzduž tunela NDR L GD RPRJXüH integrisanu
ventilaciju obe cevi.
3URMHNWRYDQMH SUXJH 'LYDþD-.RSHU WHþH VD GXåLP SUHNLGLPD RG . godine, kada je bio
i]UDÿHQLGHMQLSURMHNDW9HüLQX projektnih rešenja je doneo Glavni Projekat (u Sloveniji je po
VWDURP ]DJRQX R JUDÿHQMX *ODYQL 3URMHNDW QD]LYDQ 3URMHNDW ]D SURGRELYDQMH JUDÿHYLQVNH
dozvole - 3*'þLMD je izrada trajala u periodu od 2007. do 2010. godine. Ovaj nivo izrade
WHKQLþNH GRNXPHQWDFLMH VX RPRJXüLOD široko zasnovana geološka i hidrogeološka
istraživanja, koja su bila izvedena u istom periodu. Geološko-JHRPHKDQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDVX
]DKYDWLODL]YRÿHQMHterenskih istraživanja, VDVYLPSUDWHüLPODERUDWRULMVNLPLVWUDåLYDQMLPD i
NRPSOHPHQWDUQLPJHRIL]LþNLPLVWUDåQLPUDGovima (DRSI, 2010). Posebno su bila izvedena
istraživanja karsta u zoni tunela T1 i T2 i kao sveobuhvatna hidrogeološka istraživanja, koju
su pored hidrogeološkog kartiranja vodenih tokova na površini obuhvatila postavljanje
piezometara ]DGXJRURþQRSUDüHQMHQLYRDSRdzemne vode u karstnom okruženju u zoni trase.
U periodu od 2014. do 2017. godine, izvedeni VXGRGDWQLLVWUDåLYDþNL radovi sa težištem na
GRSXQL LVWUDåLYDQMD NUDãNLK SRMDYD NDR L LQWHUSUHWDFLML GXJRURþQRJ KLGURJHRORãNRJ
monitoringa. Rezultati osnovnih i dodatnih istraživanja su postali osnova za izradu projekta
za izvoÿHQMH- 3=,NRMLMHSRþHRMXQa ove godine. Prema planu investitora SRþHWDNizgradnje
pruge je SUHGYLÿHQ]DVUHGLQX0. JRGLQHSULþHPXMHSUHGDMDSURMHNWD3=,SUHGYLÿHQDX
toku marta iste godine. U toku je gradnja dostupnih puteva (na sOLFLR]QDþHQLKFUYHQRP
ERMRPNRMDVXL]YHGHQDSUHGKRGQRGDELVNUDWLORXNXSQRYUHPHL]YRÿHQMDUDGRYD
8 þODQNX VX, kao osnova za projektovanje tunela T1, predstavljeni glaYQL ]DNOMXþFL
istraživanja karsta kao i geoloških i hidrogeoloških istražnih radova duž trase. Na osnovu
toga, u nastavku su SUHGVWDYOMHQH NOMXþQH RGOXNH X Vmislu izbora tehnološkog procesa
gradnje, WLSLþQDUHãHQMD]DVDYODÿLYDQMHNUDãNLKSRMDYD kao i mere koje su potrebne za zaštitu
vodenih resursa, koji su ispostavljeni gradnji u osetljivom karstnom okruženju.
OPŠTI GEOLOŠKI USLOVI GRADNJE
,]PHÿX.R]LQHi Kopra se nalazi graniþna zona znana kao Kraški Rub L]PHÿXSROXRVWUYD
Istra, NRMLSULSDGDMDGUDQVNRMPLNURSORþL i Krasa NDUVWXVORYHQDþNRPMH]LNXNRMLSULSDGD
spoljašnjim Dinaridima. Slojevita geološka struktura je rezultat reverznog preloma koji je
naVWDRL]PHÿX Eocena i Oligomiocena. Glavna osobina Kraškog Ruba je sekvenca prelomnih
36
]RQDXNRMLPDVHPODÿHNUHþQMDþNHSODVWL, iz doba Paleocena i ranog i srednjeg Eocena, nalaze

iznad starijh plasti lapora, koje pripadaju flišnoj sekvenci iz doba ranog Eocena. Prelomi su
bili aktivni u post-Miocenu zbog potiskivanja istarskog poluostrva ispod spoljašnjih Dinarida
X]RQLNRQWDNWDDIULþNHLHYURD]LMVNHWHNWRQVNHSORþH3ODFHU
Na površini terena se ta zona vidi u obliku geomorfološkog fenomena koji se rasprostire od

kvarnerVNRJGRWUãüDQVNRJ]DOLYD6OLND2) i to QDMþHãüHXobliku vertikalnog klifa visine od
50 m do 100 m, koga nazivamo Kraški Rub. Preklapanje reverznih preloma je dovelo do
LGHODQLK XVORYD ]D IRUPLUDQMH NDUVWQLK SRMDYD QD VORYHQDþNRM NUDãNRM YLVRUDYQL NRMD VH
SURVWLUHLVWRþQRRG.UDãNRJ5XED
Slika 2. Pojednostavljena šema Kraškog Ruba (debela crna linija), NRMLUD]GYDMDGHOLPLþQR flišnu
stensku masu (siva boja) od NUHþQMDþNH(bela boja), po Placeru 2007
Figure 2. Simplified scheme of Karst Edge (heavy black line), separating in parts flysch rock
formations (in grey) from carbonate rocks (in white); after Placer 2007.
8WLSLþQRj geološkoj sekvenci, zbog svoje niske propustljivosti vodeIOLã]DGUåDYD]QDþDMQH

NROLþLQH YRGH NRMH VH QDOD]H X YRGRQRVQRP NUHþQMDNX NRML MH YLãH OHåHþL =ERJ WRJD MH
prisutna visoka karstifikacija na i ispod kraške visoravni unutar koje se nalaze Postojnska i
Škocjanska jama. Škocjanska jama je pod zaštitom UNESCO-D NDR MHGQD RG QDMYHüLK
podzemnih kraških jama u svetskim razmerama. Dodatna karstifikacija unutar kraške
visoravni nastaje uzduž sub-vertikalnih preloma, koji su nastali kao rezultat tektonske
aktivnosti, tako GDQHWRSDGDYLQHSUDNWLþQRXFHORWLYHUWLNDOQRSRQLUXXSRG]HPQHkraške reke
L NDQDOH 8 SULPHUX WUDVH åHOH]QLþNH SUXJH 'LYDþD – Koper imamo tako primer gradnje
tunelskih konstrukcija u podzemnom prostoru, u kome VH SUHSOLüX X]DMDPQD GHMVWYD YLãH
kapitalnih geoloških fenomena: strukturne geologije, tektonike, geologije karsta i složenih
hidrogeoloških uslova, koja su posledica gore navedenih procesa.
Kao što je prikazano na slici 2, trasa nove åHOH]QLþNe OLQLMD'LYDþD– Koper se nalazi u blizini
SRVWRMHüHJDXWRSXWDþLMDje gradnja bila završena 2007. godine. Na tom delu autoputa je bilo
RWNULYHQRRNRNUDãNLKSRMDYDXNOMXþQRVa kraškom jamom, koja je bila otkrivena u tunelu
Kastelec. Jama u tunelu Kastelec spada u deo kompleksa Ocizelskih YLãHOHåHüLK jama (Knez
i Slabe, 2005). Jama je dužine 350 m i dubine 70 m i sadrži više etaža i ponora. Prostorska
37
RULHQWDFLMDMDPHQLMHSUHGVWDYOMDOD]QDþDMDQSUREOHP]DJUDGQMXWXQHOD-RYLþLü, 2006). U toku

iskopa se jama otvorila u boku tunela WDNRGDMHVDQDFLMDRPRJXüLODSUHPDQHWDQGRVWXSGR
jame za potrebe istraživanja karsta.
Problemi sa kraškim pojavama u zoni kraške visoravni, LVWRþQR RG .UDãNRJ 5XED, bili su
rešavani u fazi gradnje autoputa. Principi VDYODÿLYDQMDNUDãNLKSRMDYD su tada bila oprobani
u praksi kako na površini terena tako i po zemljom u fazi gradnje tunela. Važna razlika u
VDYODÿLYDQMX NUDãNLK SRMDYD L]PHÿX gradnje autoputa i železnice je u tome, da je trasa
železnice niže postavljena u prostor7R]QDþLGDüHJUDGQMDåHOH]QLþNLKWXQHODELWLizložena
YHüHP uticaju podzemne vode, koja u kraškom okruženju ima poseban režim i predstavlja
poseban izazov za gradnju, NDRãWRüHELWLREMDãQMHQRXQDVWDYNX
OCENA USLOVA GRADNJE TUNELA U KARSTU
Pojave NDUVWLILNDFLMHNDUVWQLIHQRPHQLVXXþODQNXXSRWUHEOMHQLNDRSRMPRYLNRMLRSLVXMX

SRG]HPQHSURVWRUHNRMLVXWLSLþQL]DNDUVWQRRNUXåHQMHLMHVXSRYH]DQHVDJUDGQMRPWXQHOD
bilo da su u gabaritu iskopa tunela ili izvan njega, pULþHPXXVYDNRPVOXþDMXXWLþXQDJUDGQMX
7RVXXãLUHPVPLVOXNDUVWQLNDQDOLMDPHSHüLQHLSRQRULNRMLVXSUD]QLLVSXQMHQLVDYRGRP
LOLVDVHGLPHQWLPD,]UD]NDUVWQLIHQRPHQLNUDãNHSRMDYHXSRWUHEOMDYDPRL]DUD]OLþLWHYUVWH
pukotina ili sistema pukotina, kao i druge diskontinuitete, koji XWLþu na stabilnost ili
vodopropustnost stenske mase, koja je izložena kartifikaciji.
U okviru istraživanja karsta u zoni trase tunela T1 i T2, je bila izvedena provera prostorske
orientacije znanih jamskih sistemov predhodno zavedenih u SRVWRMHüLm bazama podataka.
Ustanovljeno je bilo, da trasa Tunela T2 prolazi kroz sistem jamskih rovova Ocizeljske jame.
Zbog toga se izkazala potreba da se trasa tunela T2 pomeri prema severozapadu za 70m da
bi se izbegao prodor NUR] YHüL MDPVNL VLVWHP. Ocizeljski jamski sistem je na toj dubini
hidrološki aktivan i ima protok od više kubnih metara u sekundi, kao i zabeležene oscilacije
nivoa podzemne vode od oko 20m. U okviru pregleda izbušenog materijala bilo je izvršeno
NDUWLUDQMH NUDãNLK SRMDYD L QD RVQRYX WRJD MH ELOR PRJXüH GRELWL RSãWX VOLNX R stepenu
NDUVWLILNDFLMHNRMDMHELODVWDWLVWLþQRREUDÿHQDLXSRUHÿHQMDVDSRVWRMHüLPSRGDFLPD8 okviru
dodatnih istraživanja, QDMYHüD MDPD Eila je odkrivena na nivou nivelete tunela T1, gde je
visLQDL]EXãHQRJURYDL]QRVLODP5RYMHELRL]SXQMHQVLJRPLVHGLPHQWLPDLORYDþDJOLQD
što govori o umirenoj sedimentaciji bez brzih vodenih tokova.
.OMXþQL GRSULQRV LVWUDåLYDQMD NUDVD X RNYLUX JHRORãNR-JHRPHKDQLþNLK LVWUDåLYDQMD ELOD MH
ocena stope karstifikacije uzduž tunela T1 i T2, koja je prikazana na slici 3 (ZAG, 2010). Iz
VOLNHVHYLGLRFHQDIUHNYHQFLLGLPHQ]LMDNDUVWQLKIHQRPHQDNRMDVHRþHNuju u toku gradnje.
7UDVDWXQHOD7]DKYDWD]RQXYHüHNDUVWLILNDFLMHSUDNWLþQRSRþLWDYRMVYRMRMGXåLQLSULþHPX
VH RþHNXMX NDUVWQL IHQRPHQL YHOLþLQH GR P VD IUHNYHQFRP GR SRMDYD QD GXåQL
NLORPHWDU8WXQHOX7]RQDYHüHNDUVWLILNDFLMHQDVOLFLMH obojena crveno) zahvata samo
MHGQXWUHüLQXWXQHOD8VOXþDMXREDWXQHODRFHQMHQDMHPRJXüQRVWSRMDYHNUDãNLKIHQRPHQD
GR YHOLþLQH P ãWR RGJRYDUD GLPHQ]LMDPD WXQHOD ,] VOLNH VH YLGL GD RED WXQHOD LPDMX
odseke koje se nalaze u flišnoj segeološkoj sekvHQFL SUL þHPX MH X WXQHOX 7 WDM RGVHN
GXJDþDNNPGRNMHXWXQHOX7NP7RMHSRVOHGLFDUHODWLYQRNUDWNRJSUROD]DWUDVH
NUR]GROLQXUHNH*OLQãþLFHNRMDMHXJHRPRUIRORãNRPVPLVOXRPRJXüLODGDVHSRG]HPQLGHR
WUDVHNRMLELLQDþHELRGXJDþDNNP, razdeli na tunele T1 i T2.
38
Slika 3. Raspodela karstifikacije uzduž tunela T1 i T2 (odesk u flišu je prikazan u beloj boji)
Slika 3. Distribution of karstification along tunnels T1 and T2 (flysch sections in white).
1DNRQWDNXNUHþQMDþNHLflišne sekvence, odnosno u zoni tranzicije koju karakteriše prelomna

zona se RþHNXMX najteži uslovi gradnje za oba tunela. Posebnu kompleksnost nastalim
okolnostima na tom mestu daje prisustvo podzemne vode, koje se na kontaku zadržava v
flišu, GRNXNUHþQjaku nalazi puteve kroz karstne fenomene visoke vodpropusnosti. U smislu
gradnje tunela se na tom mestu RþHNXMH VWHQVNDPDVDL]X]HWQRQLVNHQRVLYRVWLSULþHPXüH
YHOLNHNROLþLQHYRGHGRGDWQRRWHåDYDWLLVNRSWXQHOD
HIDROGEOLOŠKI USLOVI GRADNJE
Iz osnovnih i dodatnih hidrogeoloških istraživanja (ZAG, 2010; ZRMK, 2018) ustanovljeno

je da u zoni karsta trasa prolazi kroz hidrogeološke uslove koji su složeni i to kako sa vidika
gradnje tunela tako i sa vidika uticaja tunelogradnje na karstno okruženje u hidrogeološkom
smislu. 7XQHO7WHþHXYHüRMPHULNUR]regionalne duboke kraške i pukotinske vodonosne
VLVWHPH1RWUDQMVNH5HNHUHND7LPDYHL%ROMXQFDSULþHPXVHWXQHO7QDOD]LXYRGR]DãWLWQRM
zoni reke Rižane. U manjem stepenu tuneli teku kroz flišne slojeve i tektonski razvejane
SUHORPQHVWUXNWXUHYRGRQRVQRJVLVWHPDUHNH*OLQãþLFH
U fazi interpretacije hidrogeoloških okolnosti, izvršena je procena nivoa podzemne vode i
njegove oscilacije, koja je prikazana na slici 4, u odnosu na nivo tunela. Ta ocena temelji na
interpretaciji geološke strukture, merenja propustljivosti vode i SUDüHQMD SURPHQH nivoa
podzemne vode, koji je bio dugoroþQRmeren u uticajnoj ]RQLWUDVHWXQHOD7L73UDüHQMH
nivo podzemne vode neprekidno traje YHü 10 JRGLQDWDNRGDMHREXKYDWLORUD]OLþLWDKLGURORãND
doba i klimatske sezone, na osnovu þHJD MH ELOR PRJXüH relativno precizno odrediti
KLGUDXOLþQHNDUDNWHULVWLNHYRGRQRVQLND Istraživanja su pokazala da su hidrogeološki uslovi
NOMXþQL]DVDJOHGDYDQMHVORåHQRVWLJUDGQMHWXQHOD, s obzirom da tuneli T1 i T2 prolaze kroz
karstne fenomene, koji su istovremeno pretežni QRVLRFL KLGUDXOLþQH SURYRGQRVWL Unutar
kraških zona su veoma verovatne SRMDYHWHNXüHYRGHSURPHQOMLYRJWRNDNRMa mestimiþno
39
PRåH GD GRVWLJQH SULWLVNH YHüH RG EDUD Izmerene promene nivoa podzemne vode u
RGUHÿHQLPWDþNDPD, dostigle su brzine od par desetina metara na sat. (Ratej i Prestor, 2019)
Slika 4. 3URFHQD KLGURJHRORãNLK XVORYD JUDGQMH WXQHOD 7 , 7 VD WLSRYLPD L]YRÿHQMD (drenirani i
nedrenirani odseci – Ratej i Prestor, 2019)
Figure 4. Estimate of hydrogeological conditions for construction of tunnels T1 and T2 with selection
of the type of execution (drained and undrained sections, Ratej and Prestor, 2019)
8QDVWDYNXüHELWLSULND]DQDREUDGDXWLFDMDJUDGQMHWXQHODQDYRGQHUHVXUVHXYRGonosniku
NDUVWDNDRLXWLFDMSRG]HPQHYRGHQDVDPXJUDGQMX8þDVXJUDGQMHVXSUHGYLÿHQHPHUH]D
]DãWLWXUDGQHVQDJHLPDãLQDSUHGYRGQLPXGDULPDNRMLVXRþHNLYDQL]ERJEU]LKSURPHQD
vodnog režima u karstnom okruženju. S druge strane, posebna pažnja je posYHüHQDWUDMQRP
RþXYDQMX YRGRL]GDãQRVWL YRGRQRVQLND NRML QH VPH ELWL XPDQMHQ ]ERJ SULVXWQRVWL WXQHOD
2EUDÿHQH VX NDNR NUDWNRURþQH PHUH NRMH LPDM FLOM GD ]DãWLWH KHPLMVNL VDVWDY YRGH
RQHPRJXüH]DJDÿHQMHNDNRLWUDMQHPHUH]D]DãWLWXYRGQRVQLNDRJUDQLþDYanje oduzimanja
]QDþDMQLKNROLþLQDYRGH
IZBOR TEHNOLOGIJE GRADNJE
Razmatrana su bila dva tipa tehnologije gradnje tunela: TBM (Tunnel boring Machine) i
metoda bušenja i miniranja sa upotrebom sidara i mlaznog betona tzv. NATM (New Austrian
Tunelling Method). Metod TBM je LPDOR VPLVOD GREUR SUHXþLWL MHU WXQHOL 7 L 7 LPDMX
dužine koje su YHüH RG km. 1DþHOQR Wuneli minimalne dužine od 4km se smatraju
JUDQLþQRP YUHGQRVWL ]D isplatljivost upotrebe 7%0 WHKQRORJLMH ]ERJ YHOLNLK SRþHWQLK
troškova ãWR]QDþLGD VHQDNUDüLPWXQHOLPDRQDSRSUavilu ne isplati.
TBM tehnologija se smatra najefikasnijom u MHGQROLþQLP uslovima iskopa tunela odnosno za
homogenu stensku masu u kojoj MH PRJXüH SRVWLüL YHOLNe napretNH VD LVWLP RUXÿLPD L
metodama iskopa. Uspeh upotrebe TBM tehnologije zavisi od pravilne pripreme portalne
40
]RQHQHSUHNLQMHQHGRVWDYHHOHNWULþQHHQHUJLMHPRJXüQRVti jednostavnog održavanja mašine,

sposobnosti posade i ispred svega pravilne selekcije TBM mašine za date geološke uslove
0DLGO.DRãWRüHELWLSRND]DQRXQDVWDYNXQDSULPHUXLVNRSDWXQHOD7L7QLMHELOR
PRJXüHXVSHãQR]DGRYROMLWLJRUHQDYHGHQHNOMXþQHNULWHULMXPH
Prvo je bilo uzeto u obzir da oba tunela imaju pored odseNDXNUHþQMDNXLduže odseke u flišu
GRNRMLKMHSRWUHEQRGRüLSUHNR]RQHWUDQ]LFLMHXNRMRMYODGDMXWHãNLJHRORãNLLKLGURJHRORãNL
uslovi. Za te teže uslove otvoreni TBM, koji bi bio potSXQRDGHNYDWDQ]DXVORYHXNUHþQMDNX
ne bi bio primeren. U flišu bi ELOR SRWUHEQR DQJDåRYDWL WDNR]YDQX ÝPL[HG VKLHOG 7%0Ý
PDãLQXNRMDSURMHNWXMH]DãWLWQLãWLWLVSUHGþHODLVNRSDLRPRJXüDYDDOWHUQDWLYQHQDþLQHUDGD
NRMLSUDWHSURPHQXJUDQLþQLKXVORYD8]RQLWUDQ]LFLMHELYHURYDWQRELORSRWUHEQRDQJDåRYDti
WUHüXYUVWX7%0-DLWRÝ(DUWK%DODQFH3UHVVXUHÝPDãLQXNRMDL]MHGQDþDYDJHRVWDWLþNHpritiske
QDþHOXLkoja je primerena za uslove rastresitog tla i velike pritiske vode.
6OHGHüHUD]PDWUDQMHMHELORYH]DQRQDVDYODÿLYDQMHNUDãNLKSRMDYDNDUVWQLKIHQRPHQa) koje
EL PRJOH GD L]D]RYX WRWDOQL JXELWDN 7%0 PDãLQH 7R VH PRåH GRJRGLWL ]ERJ GHOLPLþQRJ
SURSDGDQMD PDãLQH X NUDãNL SRQRU LOL MDPX NRML PRåH GD L]D]RYH GHOLPLþQo ili potpuno
RGVWXSDQMHRGSUDYFDEXãHQMD8WRPVOXþDMXELELORSRWUHEQRL]YHVWLSULVWXSGRþHOD7%0VD
by-SDVVWXQHORPLYUDWLWL7%0XSUDYDF8VNODGXVDSUHGYLÿDQMLPDQDRVQRYXLVWUDåLYDQMD
NUDVDELWDNYLKGRJDÿDMDQDWUDVLWXQHOD7L7ELELORSULEOLåQRQDGXåQLNLORPHWDU (vidi
sliku 3) WDNRGDELYHURYDWQRüD]DVWRMDSULUDGXPDãLQH7%M bila izrazito velika. U svakom
sluþaju nailaska na YHüXkrašku pojavu (karstni fenomen), bez obzira na prisutnost vode, bilo
bi potrebno odstraniti TB0PDãLQXVDþHODGDELVHGLPHQ]LMHLWLSSRMDYHSUDYLOQRUD]XPHR,
što je neophodno da bi se pristupilo adekvatnoj sanaciji. To bi izazvalo redovna dodatna
kašnjenja pri iskopu. .RQDþQRSRVWRMDODELYHOLNDYHURYDWQRüDSRWDSOMDQD7%0PDãLQH]ERJ
udara vode što bi verovatno izazvalu totalnu škodu i potrebu za novim strojem.
Zbog svih gore navedenih razloga MHWHKQRORJLMD7%0ELODRGEDþHQDNDRSUHYLãHUL]LþQDL
neefikasna za date geološke i hidrogeološke uslove. Tehnologija NATM je dobila prednost
jer je X WRP VPLVOX IODNVLELOQLMD L RPRJXüDYD MHGQRVWDYQR SULODJRÿDYDQMH SURPHQama
JUDQLþQLK XVORYD 2YD PHWRGD WDNRÿH QRVL PDQMH UL]ika pri izvodjenju jer RPRJXüDYD
primenu UD]OLþLWLh postupaka koji smanjuju UL]LNH SUL L]YRÿHQMX UDGRYD (pred-bušenje,
prethodno dreniranje, izrada pilotnih tunela u zoni karstnih fenomena i drugo). 7DNRÿH, ovaj
PHWRGRPRJXüDYDQHVPHWDQLSULOD]NUDãNRMSRMDYLNDUVWQRPIHQRPHQXWDNRGDMHPRJXüH
relativno brzo razviti projektno rešenje za savlaÿLYDQMH pojave i njenu sanaciju (Marinos
0LODQRYLü
MERE ZA 6$9/$Ĉ,9$1-(.$5671,+32-$9$,ZAŠTITU
VODONOSNIKA
Projekat podpornih mera u tunelu T1 je bio zasnovan na principima NATM metode

(Rabcevicz, 1964/1965) uz upotrebu za to važeüeg ausutrijskog standarda ÖNORM B 2203-
1. Kao što se vidi iz slike 3, WUDVD WXQHOD 7 WHþH SUHWHåQR NUR] NUHþQMDþNH (5,95 km) i
GHOLPLþQRkroz flišne formacije (0,75 km)SULþHPXMHSRWHåLQLL]GYRMHQDSUHORPQD]RQD
koja se nalazi na kontaktu te dve geološke sekvence. Za to geološko okruženje i za datu višinu
nadsloja (koML X QDMGXEOMRM WDþNL QLYelete tunela iznosi oko 400m) je bilo zasnovano 5
UD]OLþLWLKWLSRYDSRQDãDQMDBT – behavioural type) sa dominantim tipom BT2, koji se odnosi
QDNRQWLQXLUDQHGLVNRQWLQXLWHWHLPRJXüQRVWVPLþXüHJORPD. 1DRVQRYXVWDWLþNLKanaliza, bilo
41
je RGUHÿHQLK UD]OLþLWLKWLSRYD]DXSRWUHEX PDWULþQHPRWRGHkoje su vodile do definisanja 29

UD]OLþLWLK tipova podupiranja s upotrebom obloge od armiranog mlaznog betona i radijalnih
SN sLGDUDUD]OLþLWHGXåLQHLJXVWLQH.
Direktna upotreba standarda nije bila primerena za definisanje podpornih mera na mestima
kolizije sa karstnim pojavama, zato je za rešenje tog izazova u projektovanju bilo neophodno
preuzeti potSXQRGUXJDþLMLSULVWXS Karstna (kraška) pojava je ovde upotrebljena kao izraz za
SRG]HPQHSURVWRUHNRMLVXWLSLþQL]DNDUVWQRRNUXåHQMHLSRYH]DQLVXVDJUDGQMRPWXQHOD
bilo da presecaju trasu tunela, bilo da se nalaze dovoljno blizu GD XWLþX posredno ili
neposredno na iskop. Za karstne pojave su širem smislu smatraju karstni kanali, kaverne,
jame i ponori koji su prazni ili ispunjeni sa vodom ili sa rastresitim materijalom niske
nosivosti. ,]UD]VHXSRWUHEOMDYDL]DVYHGUXJHWLSLþQHNDUVWQHSRMDYHNDRãWRVXLVSXFDORVWL
visoka vodpropustnost stenske mase, kao i integrisanost jama u jamski sistem, gde je voda
SRYH]DQDLWHþHEH]RJUDQLþHQMD
8 RVQLYDQMX VLVWHPDWLþQRJ SULVWXSD SUREOHPX NROL]ije tunela sa karstnim pojavama, sve
pojave smo UD]GHOLOLXUD]OLþLWHNDWHJRULMHXRGQRVXQDDSRORåDMXSURVWRUXXRGQRVXQD
tXQHOXRVLERþQRLVSRGLL]QDGEYHOLþLQL]DSUHPLQHkraške pojave (do 5 m3, 5 - 10 m3,
do 50 m3), c) ispunjenosti (kaverna je prazna ili je ispunjena sa glinenim materijalom) i d)
prisutnost vode (suve zone i vodonosne zone).
=DVYDNXRGPRJXüLKNombinacija uslova od a) do d) je bila razvijena matrica podpornih
mera. Opredeljene su sistemske sanacijske mere, tako da se prepreke u smislu karstnih pojava
PRJXUHãDYDWLVLVWHPDWLþQo XRGQRVXQDQMLKRY]QDþDM.OMXþQDSLWDQMDVXELODDVWDELOQRVW
tunela (kako privremena tako i trajna), b) RþXYDQMH ]DWHþHQRJ KLGURJHRORãNRJ VWDQMD L
SRVWRMHüLKKLGUDXOLþQLKNDQDODNDo LFGXJRURþDQXWLFDMJUDGQMHWXQHODQDNROLþLQVNRVWDQMH
u vodonosQLNX 3UHGYLGMHQ MH ELR QL] PHUD ]D RGNULYDQMHYUVWH L YHOLþLQH NDUVWQLK SRMDYD
XNOMXþQR VD JHRORãNLP L KLGURJHROãNLP NDUWLUDQMHP NDUWLUDQMHP NDUVWQLK SRMDYD SUHG-
bušenjem SUHGþHORPLVNRSDL upotrebom JHRIL]LþNLKVWUDåLYDQMD]DRGNULYDQMHSRMDYDNRMH
nisu vidljive, a nalaze se u blizini tunela.
U nastavku su mere sanacije i rekonstrukcije bile podeljene na YLãHUD]OLþLWLKNDWHJRULMDX
odnosu na uticaj, koje te pojave imaju na napredovanje radova; a) ne zaustavljaju
napredovanje iskopa (npr. kraška pojava do 10 m3 izvan gabarita tunela), b) privremeno
zaustavljaju glavni iskop i zahtevaju hitne mere (napr. kraška pojava do 50 m3, delno u
gabaritu tunela sa manjim dotokom vode i c) zaustavljaju napredovanje radova do
pronalaženja rešenja (npr. ponor isprHGWXQHODYHOLþLQHPVDYHOLNLPGRWRNRPYRGH).
SvLWLGRJDÿDMLVXELOLRFHQMHQLXVPLVOXYHURYDWQRüHQMLKRYHSRMDYHWDNRGDMHDQDOiza rizika
ELODVDVWDYQLGHRRGUHÿLYDQMa GLQDPLNHUDGRYDSUHGPHUDLSUHGUDþXQDNDRLRFHQe vrednosti
radova.
MerHVDQDFLMHLREQRYHVX]DKYDWDOHVOHGHüHDNWLYQosti: zapunjavanje praznina, poboljšavanje
WOD LQMHNWLUDQMH REH]EHÿHQMH YRGRGUåLYRVWL RMDþDQMH XQXWUDãQMH REORJH L REH]EHÿLYDQMH
RELOD]QLK GUHQDåQLK NDQDOD ]D YRGRQRVQH NUDãNH SRMDYH ,]ERU WLSLþQLK UHãHQMD za
VDYODÿLYDQMHNUDãNLKSRMDYDMHSULNazan na slikama 5a, 5b i 5c.
42
Slika 5a. Sanacija karstnog kanala <10 m3, koji preseca tunel.
Figure 5a. Remediation of the karst channel <10 m3 intersectingg with the tunnel
Slika 5b. Sanacija jame, napunjene sa glinenim materijalom <50 m3, koja je u gabaritu
tunela.
Figure 5b. Remediation of the karst cave <50 m3 intersecting with the tunnel
Slika 5c. Sanacija jame, napunjene sa glinenim materijalom <50 m3, koja se nalazi izvan gabarita
tunela.
Figure 5a. Remediation of the karst cave filled with clayey material <50 m3 intersecting with the
tunnel
43
=D SRWUHEH JUDGQMH SUXJH 'LYDþD .RSHU, u fazi izrade dokumentacije za pridobijanje
JUDÿHYLQVNHGR]YROH, je ELODL]UDÿHQDDQDOL]DUL]LND]D]DJDÿHQMHSRG]HPQHYRGHLYRGQRJ
rezervoara Rižana, koji služi za vodosnabdevanje obalne regije u Sloveniji (Ratej i Prestor,
2012). U okviru te analize su bile ispostavljenje mere za zaštitu vodnosnika u zoni izgradnje
pruge, koje su bile osnova za projektna rešenja. Mere su podeljenje na: a) privremene (koje
LPDMX]DFLOM]DãWLWXþLVWRüHYRGHXþDVXL]JUDGQMHRGQRVQRSUHYHQFLMXKHPLMVNRJ]DJDÿHQMD
LEWUDMQHNRMHLPDMX]DFLOMRGUåDYDQMHNROLþLQHYRGHXYRGQRVQLNXRGQRVQRRJUDQLþDYDQMH
oduzimanja vode iz njega zbog prisustva tunela).
Privremene PHUHVXGHILQLVDOHSRVWXSNHXþDVXJUDGQMHNDRLSURFHGXUHXVOXþDMXLQFLGHQWQLK
dogaÿDMDVDQDPHURP]DãWLWHþLVWRüHYRGH3UHGYLÿHQHVXSRVHEQHPHUH]DãWLWHSULJUDGQML
NRMHXNOMXþXMXREUD]RYDQMHUDGQHVQDJH]a rad u posebnim uslovima, upotrebu gUDÿHYLQVNLK
materijala koji si hemijsko stabilni (mlazni beton, injektrine mase) tako da ne dolazi do
izluživanja supstanci u podzenu YRGXSUHþLãþDYDQMHWHKQRORãNHYRGHSRVHEQLUHåLPLUDGD
SUL RGUåDYDQMX WHãNH JUDÿHYLQVNH PHKDQL]DFLMH WHNXüL KLGUogeološki i hidrološki nadzor i
drugo.
U okviru privremenih mera, bili su UD]UDÿHQLVFHQDULMLXWLFDMDXGDUDYRGHQDJUDGQMXWXQHOD
5D]YLMHQH VX PHUH ]D HYDNXDFLMX UDGQH VQDJH L JUDÿHYLQVNLK PDãLQD X VOXþDMX EU]RJ
potapljanja tunela. Te mere obuhvataju upotrebu zaštitnih vrata NRMDVHXJUDÿXMXVXNFHVLYQR
sa napredovanjem tunela &LOM ]DãWLWQLK YUDWD MH GD ]DGUåH WDODV XGDUD YRGH ]D RGUHÿHQ
vremenski period koji je potreban za evakuaciju ljudi i materijalnih dobara3UHGYLÿHQRMHGD
VH YRGQD YUDWD XJUDÿXMX QD VYDNLK P LVSUHG SRSUHþQH YH]H GR GUXJH FHYL WDNR GD MH
RPRJXüHQRVSašavanje i rešavanje u više slobodnih pravaca.
U svom osnovnom obliku je tunel konstrusian tako da drenira vodu iz vodnosnika i tako
RQHPRJXüLSUHQRV SULWLVNDYRGH QD VHNXQGDUQXREORJX WXQHOD 7R UHãHQMH MH SULND]DQRQD
slici 6, na kojoj je predstavljen kaUDNWHULVWLþQLSRSUHþQLSUHVHN.33WXQHODXGUHQLUDQRP
REOLNX.DRãWRVHYLGLQDVOLFLMHXGUHQLUDQRMYHU]LMLWXQHORSUHPOMHQVDERþQLPGUHQDåQLP
FHYLPD þLMD MH IXQNFLMD GD SUHXzmu vodu koja se SURFHÿXMH L] VWHQVNH PDVH L SRPRüX
hidroizolacijske membrane usmerava prema njima1DPHVWLPDQLãD]DþLãüHQMHSUHGYLÿHQD
je SRSUHþQDYH]DL]PHÿXGYHERþQHFHYLNRMDSUHXVPHUDYDYRGXXFHQWUDOQXGUHQDåQXFHY
NRMDVHQDOD]LXRVLSUHVHND'UHQLUDQMHQDWDMQDþLVSXãWDSULWLVNHYRGHL]RNUXåHQMDWXQHODL
L]MHGQDþDYDLKVDDWPRVIerskim pritiskom koji je u cevi8VOXþDMXQHGreniranja, pritisci vode
u okruženju tunela mogu da dostignu vrednosti do 10 bara ili više, tako da je dreniranje nužna
PHUDNRMDRPRJXüDYDHNRQRPLþDQLUDFLRQDOQLGL]DMQWXQHOVNHNRQVWrukcije.
Za zaštitu NROLþLQVNRJVWDQMDSRG]HPQHYRGHXNDUVWQRPYRGQRVQLNXMHSUHGYLÿHQRGDüH
WXQHOQDNULWLþQLPRGVHFLPDELWLL]YHGHQWDNRGDQHGUHQLUDYRGRQRVQLN7R]QDþLGDüHQD
RGUHÿHQLPRGVHFLPDELWLXNLQMHQHERþQHGUHQDåQHFHYL9RGDNRMDWHþHL]GUHQLUDQRJGHOD
tunela se tranzitno prenosi kroz centralnu drenažnu cev koja ima zahtevani kapacitet.
.DUDNWHULVWLþQLSRSUHþQLSUHVHN]DQHGUHQLUDQHRGVHNHWXQHODMHSULND]DQQDVOLFL.DRãWR
MH SUHGKRGQR REMDãQMHQR WDNYR UHãHQMH ]QDþL GD VHNXQGarna obloga mora da preuzme
RGQRVQRL]GUåLYLVRNHKLGURVWDWLþNHSULWLVNH=ERJWRJDMHXQHGUHQLUDQLYHU]LML.33SUDNWLþQR
NUXåQRJREOLND1DWDMQDþLQSULWLVFLYRGHL]D]LYDMXVDPRSR]LWLYQHQRUPDOQHVLOHXREOR]L
koja je bez obzira na to konstruktivno armirana.
44
Slika 6.DUDNWHULVWLþQLpoSUHþQLSUHsek u dreniranom delu tunela

Figure 6: Characteristic cross section in drained section of the tunnel
45
Slika 7.DUDNWHULVWLþQLSRSUHþQLSUHVHNXnedreniranom delu tunela

Figure 7: Characteristic cross section in undrained section of the tunnel
Za debljino sekundarne obloge od približno 50 cm je, sa uzimanjem u obzir svih faktora

VLJXUQRVWLJUDQLþQDYUHGQRVWSULWLVNDYRGHSULEOLåQREDUD3ULWRPHMHSRWUHEQRQDJODVLWL
da svako odstupanje obloge od kružnog oblika, recimo tamo gde se nalaze niše ili na mestima
SRSUHþQLK YH]D L]D]LYD QDSRQH ]DWH]DQMD L SRMDYX VLQJXODUQLK QDSRQVNLK WDþDND QD
NRQWDNLPDãWRMHXVWDWLþQRPVPLVOXQHSULKYDWOMLYR8VNODGXVDWLPüHVHSRSUHþQHYH]H
L]PHÿXFHYLL]YHVWLLVNOMXþLYRXGUHQLUDQRPREOLNXSULþHPXüHVHX njihovom okruženju sa
primenom kontaktnog injektiranja smanjiti propustljivost vode stenske mase. Svrha
LQMHNWLUDQMDMHGDVHXSUNRVGUHQLUDQRMYHU]LMLWXQHODX]RQLSRSUHþQLKYH]Dsmanji oduzimanje
vode iz vodnosnika.
46
Slika 8: 3RSUHþQLpresek QLãHVDYHQWLORP]DYUDüDQMHYRGHXYRGRQRVQLN

Figure 8: Cross section of the niche with the valve for the return of the water into the aquifer
Na slici 4 prikazana su RþHNLYDQDPHVWD]D drenirane i nedrenirani odsek za oba tunela. Ocena

potrebe po jednoj ili drugoj verziji je izvršena na osnovu ocene vodoprepustnosti
YRGRQRVQLND7DPRJGHVHRþHNXMHGDMHYRGRSUHSXVWQRVWQLVNDGHRQLFHXIOLãX i bankovitom
NUHþQMDNXL]YRGL se GUHQLUDQDYDULMDQWDMHUMHSUHGYLÿHQRRGX]LPDQMHYRGHPDORRGQosno
]DQHPDUOMLYR8VXSURWQRPWDPRJGHMHYRGRSUHSXVWQRVWYHOLNDLVSXFDOLNUHþQMDNNUDãNH
pojave – odnosno karstni fenomeni) SUHGYLÿHQD je nedrenirana varzija, jer bi tamo
RGX]LPDQMHYRGHELOR]QDþDMDQR1DRGUHÿHQLPRGVHFLPD, gde nivo podzemne vode padne
ispod nivoa tunela (vidi sliku 4)SRVWRMLPRJXüQRVWGDVHYRGDnizvodno vrati u vodonosnik.
Na slici 8 MHSULND]DQDQLãDSRPRüXNRMHVHXQDMEOLåLNDUVWQLIHQRPHQNUDãNDMDPDLOLSRQRU
YUDüD QD]DG RGX]HWD YRGD .DR ãWR VH YLGL L] VOLNH, niša je opremljena sa ventilom koji
RPRJXüDYDGD, XVOXþDMXGDMHSULWLVDNYRGHXNDUVWQRPIHQRPHQXQLåL, YRGDLVWLþHYDQ8
suprotnom je ventil koji radi na principu zaklopke zatvoren, tako da ulazak vode u drenažni
VLVWHPQLMHPRJXü
47
Kao jedna od NOMXþQLK PHUD ]D RþXYDQMe protoka vode u vodonosnuiku je SUHGYLÿHQD
izgradnja RELOD]QLK NDQDOD ]D WRN YRGH X VOXþDMX VUHüDQMD tunela sa vodnosnim kraškim
fenomenom. 8WRPVOXþDMXGLPHQ]LMHLSURVWRUVNDRULMHQWDFLMDRELOD]QRJNDQDODPRUDMXELWL
jednaka preVHþHQRPNUDãNRPIHQRPHQX]DGDWLJDEDULWSUHVHND=DWDNDYSULPHUMHYHRPD
teško dati opšte rešenje jer je SRWUHEQRSUYRVDJOHGDWLRVQRYQHJUDQLþQHXVORYHNRJDGLNWLUDMX
QHSUHYLGOMLYLNDUVWQLIHQRPHQL,]WRJUD]ORJDMHRGNOMXþQRJ]QDþDja VLVWHPDWLþQRL]YRÿHQMH
JHRWHKQLþNog i hidrogeološkog monitoringa, kao i PRQLWRULQJNDUVWDNRJDüHL]YRGLWL]DWR
VWUXþQRRVSRVREOMHQLLQåLQMHULLJHROR]L
SAŽETAK I =$./-8ý$.
Složeni hidrogeološki uslovi pri gradnji GUXJRJWLUDQRYHåHOH]QLþNHSUXJH'LYDþD– Koper

diktiraju projektna rešenja koja uzimaju u obzir VDYODÿLYDQMH NUDãNLK SRMDYD L uticaj
podzemne vode na gradnju tunela T1 i T2. Tuneli T1 i T2 se u ukupnoj dužini od oko 12 km
nalaze u stenskoj masi, koja je izložena karstnim pojavama, koje istovremeno predstavljaju
NOMXþQH QRVLRFH propustljivosti vode u vodonosniku. Pri tome je uticaj podzemne vode
REUDÿHQ GYRVPHUQR prvo NDR UL]LN L SUHSUHND ]D JUDGQMX WXQHOD L GUXJR NDR GXJRURþQL
problem oduzimanja vode iz vodnih resursa u okruženju u kome su oni veoma dragoceni.
Zaštitne mere za RþXYDQMH vodnih resursa su podeljeni na privremene i trajne. Pri

SULYUHPHQLP PHUDPD VX XVSRVWDYOMHQL NULWHULMXPL ]D ]DãWLWX þLVWRüH YRGH XVOHG XWLFDMD
gradnje tunela. Te mere zahvDWDMXXSXWVWYD]DL]YRÿHQMHUDGRYDXRVHWOMLYRPRNUXåHQMXNDUVWD
YH]DQRPQDL]YRÿHQMHNOMXþQLKDNWLYQRVW pri gradnji: iskop, transport materijala, održavanja
JUDÿHYLQVNLK mašina, upotreba JUDÿHYLQVNLK PDWHULMDOD NDR L upravljanje u kriznim i
akcidentnim situacijama.
7UDMQHPHUH]DRþXYDQMHNROLþLQVNRJVWDQMDSRG]HPQHYRGHXNDUVWQRPYRGRQRVQLNXNUR]
koga prolaze tuneli T1 i T2, odnosno mere za smanjivanje uticaja gradnje tunela na izdašnost
vodnih resursa su predstavljene kao VOHGHüH D JUDGQMD RGVHND X NRMLPD VH QH vrši
RGX]LPDQMHYRGHQHGUHQLUDQLRGVHFLEYUDüDQMe vode u vodonosnik i c) izgradnja obilaznih
NDQDOD]DWRNYRGHXVOXþDMXVUHüDQMDVDYRGQRVQLPNUDãNLPIHQRPHQRP
1DRVQRYXSULND]DQRJPDWHULMDODPRåHPR]DNOMXþLWLda su geološki i hidrogeološki uslovi

JUDGQMH åHOH]QLþNH SUXJH veoma složeni i istovremeno ostvarivi iz vidika gradnje tunela.
3RVHEDQL]D]RYSUHGVWDYOMDSULVXWVYRNUDãNLKSRMDYDSULþHPXX]DMDPQRGHMVWYRNDUVWDLX
njemu prisutne podzemne vode diktira tehnološke postupke izgradnje tunela. Predložene
PHUHLUHãHQMDNRMDVXSULND]DQDXþODQNX, REH]EHÿXMXGXJRURþQRRþXYDQMHYRGQLh resursa
kao i pouzdanoVWXSRWUHEHQRYHåHOH]QLþNHSUXJH'LYDþD-Koper.
48
LITERATURA:
DRSI - Direkcija RS za infrastrukturo, 2018 št. 3610/P: Projekt PGD drugi tir železniške proge
'LYDþD- .RSHURGVHN'LYDþD– ýUQL.DO6ä3URMHNWLYQRSRGMHWMH/MXEOMDQD
JRYLþLü, V., 2006. Examples of active design in tunnelling. V: LOGAR, Janko (ur.), GABERC, Ana
Marija (ur.), MAJES, Bojan (ur.). Active geotechnical design in infrastructure development
: proceedings of the XIIIth Danube-European Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, 29-
31 May 2006, Ljubljana, Slovenia, Slovenian Geotechnical Society.str. 439-444.
[COBISS.SI-ID 1179875]
Knez, M.; Slabe, T. Caves and sinkholes in motorway construction, Slovenia : case study 3. V:
WALTHAM, Tony, BELL, Fred, CULSHAW, Martin. Sinkholes and subsidence : karst
and cavernous rocks in engineering and construction, (Springer-Praxis books in geophysical
sciences). Berlin [etc.]: Springer: Praxis. cop. 2005, str. 283-288, ilustr. [COBISS.SI-ID
23421741]
Marinos, P. G. 2001. Tunnelling and mining in Karstic Terrain; An Engineering Challenge.
Geotechnical and Environmental Applications of Karst Geology and Hidrogeology.
Balkema publication.
0LODQRYLü3*HRORJLFDO(QJLQHHULQJLQNDUVW=HEUD3XEO%HOJUDGHS
Maidl, B. et al. 2012. Mechanised Shield Tunnelling. Wilhelm und Sohn, Berlin. 470 p.
Rabcevicz, L. V., 1964/1965. The new Austrian Tunelling Method. Water Power, part 1 and part 2,
November 1964 pp. 511-515 and January 1965 pp. 19-24.
Ratej, J., Prestor J., 2012. Analiza tveganja za onesnaženje podzemne vode in vodnega zajetja Rižana
zaradi gradnje 2. tira žele-]QLãNHSURJH'LYDþD– Koper. Geološki zavod Slovenije in
Inštitut za rudarstvo, geotehnologijo in okolje št. K-II-30d/1-1/62.
Ratej, J., Prestor J., 2019. 3UHJOHGKLGURJHRORãNLKUD]PHUYNUDãNHPYRGRQRVQLNXQDREPRþMX
SUHGRURY7LQ7QDWLUX'LYDþD– Koper=ERUQLN5HIHUDWRY6WURNRYQRVUHþDQje Nova
åHOH]QLãNDSURJD'LYDþD-Koper kot graditeljski izziv, Nova Gorica: Društvo za ceste
Primorske. pp. 55-64.
Placer L. 2007 Kraški rob (Karst Edge landscape term), Geologic section along the motorway Kozina
– Koper, GEOLOGIJA 50/1, 29–44, Ljubljana.
ZAG - Zavod za gradbeništvo, 2010. Geološko-JHRWHKQLþQLSRGDWNLSULGREOMHQLQDSRGODJLJHRORãNR-
JHRWHKQLþQLKUD]LVNDY]DID]RSURMHNWD3*'QDREPRþMXSUHGRUD7NLVR]EUDQLY
geološko-JHRWHKQLþQHPSRURþLOX]DSUHGRU7ãW7-2003353/7, november 2010.
=50.GRR3UHOLPLQDUQRSRURþLORVSRGURþMDKLGURJHRORJLMHNUDVRVRORYMDVWUXNWXUQHJHROR-
gije in geomehanike, št. 2006190-1/PP2. Ljubljana.
49
2ULJLQDOQLQDXþQLUDG
UDK 624.131.21:625.131.552
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION ON
SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF NATURAL SAND
DEPOSITS
Vlatko Sheshov, Julijana Bojadjieva, Kemal Edip,
Toni Kitanovski, Jordanka Chaneva
University "Ss Cyril and Methodius" in Skopje, Institute of Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Seismology, IZIIS, Todor Aleksandrov 165, 1000
Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia, vlatko@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
ABSTRACT
This paper presents selected results from experimental research program consisted of series
of dynamic triaxial load controlled cyclic tests and series of shaking table tests on Skopje
sand, natural alluvial sand from the river terraces of Vardar river at Skopje valley. Samples
with different relative density in the range from 40% to 75% were tested in order to define
dynamic properties and density correlation to the liquefaction susceptibility of the sand.
Series of tests on the shaking table at IZIIS were performed on fully saturated sand model
prepared in laminar box. The laminar box, with dimensions of 2m*1m in base and height of
1.5m, is consisted of 16 aluminum rectangular rings with transfer ball bearings to minimize
the friction movement. The water sedimentation method with constant water level head was
used to prepare desired density of the model. Results from the performed laboratory
experiments provide valuable information regarding the assessment of liquefaction hazard in
the alluvial deposits formed as river terraces. Based on the detailed element and model testing
program, it can be concluded that the natural alluvial sand is highly sensitive to void
parameters which under specific stress conditions can demonstrate liquefaction potential and
development of large deformation
KEY WORDS: natural sand,dynamic triaxial tests, shaking table tests, liquefaction
EKSPERIMENTALNA ISTRAŽIVANjA NA
6(,=0,ý12321$â$1M('(32=,7$35,52'12*
PESMA
REZIME
8RYRPUDGXSUHGVWDYOMHQLVXRGDEUDQLUH]XOWDWLHNVSHULPHQWDOQRJLVWUDåLYDþNRJSURJUDPD
koji su se sastojali od niza dinDPLþNLKWULMDNVQLKFLNOLþQLKWHVWRYDSRGNRQWURORPRSWHUHüHQMD
LQL]DWHVWRYDWUHãHQMDVWRODQDSHVNX6NRSOMDSULURGQRJDOXYLMDOQRJSHVNDL]UHþQLKWHUDVD
UHNH 9DUGDU XGROLQL6NRSOMD 8]RUFL UD]OLþLWH UHODWLYQHJXVWLQH XRSVHJX RG GR
testirani su NDNRELVHGHILQLVDODGLQDPLþNDVYRMVWYDLNRUHODFLMDJXVWLQHVDRVHWOMLYRãüXSHVND
na likvefakciju. Serija testova na stolu za tresenje IZIIS-DL]YHGHQDMHQDSRWSXQR]DVLüHQRP
modelu peska pripremljenom u kutiji od laminara. Laminarna kutija dimenzija 2m * 1m u
50
GQX L YLVLQH P VDVWRML VH RG DOXPLQLMXPVNLK SUDYRXJRQLK SUVWHQRYD VD NXJOLþQLP
ležajevima kako bi se minimaliziralo kretanje trenja. Za pripremu željene gustine modela
NRULãüHQDMHPHWRGDVHGLPHQWDFLMHYRGHVDJODYRPVWDOQRJQLYRDYRGH5H]Xltati izvedenih
laboratorijskih eksperimenata daju dragocene informacije u vezi sa procenom opasnosti od
OLNYHIDNFLMH X DOXYLMDOQLP QDVODJDPD IRUPLUDQLP NDR UHþQH WHUDVH 1D RVQRYX GHWDOMQRJ
HOHPHQWDLSURJUDPDWHVWLUDQMDPRGHODPRåHVH]DNOMXþLWLGDMHSrirodni aluvijalni pesak vrlo
osetljiv na pametre šupljine i da SRG VSHFLILþQLP XVORYLPD RSWHUHüHQMD PRJX SRND]DWL
potencijal likvefakcije i razvoj velikih deformacija
./M8ý1(5(ý,SULURGQLSHVDNGLQDPLþNLWULDNVLDOQLWHVWRYLWHVWRYLWUHVHQMDstola,
likvefakcija
INTRODUCTION
Earthquakes represent a major natural hazard that regularly exert impacts upon the built
environment in seismic prone areas worldwide and cause social and economic losses. Recent
earthquakes, for example, the 2010 Christchurch earthquake in New Zealand, showed that
many of the damages and economic losses were related to geotechnical problems and soil
liquefaction (Cubrinovski et al. 2010). The high losses incurred due to destructive
earthquakes promoted the need for assessment and better understanding of the soil behavior
under cyclic loading. This requires improved investigation techniques, experimental and
numerical assessment tools to minimize potential risks and develop emergency response and
recovery strategies.
In this study, the cyclic behavior of representative sand from the city of Skopje, (Cvetanovska
et al. 2013) was investigated through comprehensive experimental investigations consisted
of dynamic triaxial tests and shaking table model tests. In specific stress conditions, the
natural alluvial sand is assumed to be associated with liquefaction occurrence and
development of large deformations during an earthquake. Hence, the results from the
comprehensive investigations of this sand is a good basis for further definition, zoning and
higher awareness of the liquefaction hazard in the Republic of Macedonia. For the needs of
this project, a laminar box for shaking table tests was designed, commissioned, and installed
in the laboratory. The use of a laminar box can improve the efficiency of testing and can
better simulate ground conditions in testing of geo models. Amplification, liquefaction and
cyclic mobility phenomena, excess pore water pressure generation and dissipation rates can
be obtained by using such facilities (Sesov, 2003, Turan et al. 2009 and Ueng, 2010). The
use of the laminar box itself in future experiments on different kinds of geo-models is
expected to have a big influence on the development of the geotechnical earthquake
engineering in the European region.
NATURAL SAND – SKOPJE SAND
In this study, for investigation of the cyclic behavior and liquefaction potential in laboratory
conditions, it has been decided to use the natural sand from the river terraces of the Vardar
River, which flows through Skopje city. The decision is justified from several reasons:
51
• Possibility for continuous, long term usage of the sand for experimental research
in laboratory conditions, which will have the same characteristics and will provide
continuous upgrading of the results;
• In specific stress conditions, the natural alluvial sand is assumed to be associated
with liquefaction occurrence and large deformations during an earthquake.
The shape of the sand particles is subangular and homogeneous as it can be seen in Figure
1a. From the detailed silicate analysis, it is obtained that the sand mostly consists of silica
oxides. The grain size distribution curve of the sand (ISO/TS 17892-4:2004), is shown in
Figure 1b together with other standard sands for investigating the liquefaction phenomena.
As it can be seen Skopje sand fits well into the boundaries given by (Terzaghi, 1996) for high
susceptibility sands to liquefaction. The physical properties of Skopje sand are given in Table
1.
Table 1. Physical properties of Skopje sand
e min e max Gs [kN/m3] D 50 [mm] Cu Cc ĭ[°]
0.95 0.51 2.615 0.26 1.8 0.8 28.5
100
Skopje sand
Ottawa sand
Nevada sand
80 Toyoura sand
Fraser river sand
Vietnam sand
Coimbra sand
Percent finer [%]
60
high susceptibility to liquefaction
40
potentially liquefiable zone

20
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Particle size [mm]
Figure 1. Grain size distribution of Skopje sand together with other sands from the literature (a) and
zoomed sand particles (b)
52
TRIAXIAL TESTING PROGRAM
The performed dynamic triaxial tests are systematized in Table 2. The cyclic tests were
performed according to the ASTM standard D 5311-92 for different densities, 40%, 55% and
75%. As sample preparation method, the wet tamping (WT) method was used. More detailed
information regarding the experimental program and results can be found in Bojadjieva J.
(2015). Two main variables were analyzed, the relative density and the cyclic stress ratio.
The applied cyclic loading frequency was 0.5 Hz and the loading function was sinusoidal.
The liquefaction initiation was defined on the basis of the number of cycles required to reach
a double amplitude (DA) of axial strain of 5 %. Since this was a new type of sand and no
previous results were available, the liquefaction curves of the Skopje sand for different
densities were compared with the liquefaction curve of the standard Toyoura sand given by
Fumio Tatsuoka, 1986 in Figure 2.
The results presented in this study clearly show the liquefaction susceptibility of the Skopje
sand. During the element tests, emphasis was given on the relative density Dr of the soil
samples as one of the key parameters in shaking table test modeling. The element testing,
especially the cyclic test are a good basis for understanding better the cyclic behavior of the
Skopje sand and the density correlation with the liquefaction potential in order to use these
outcomes for simulation of liquefaction phenomena in shaking table tests on a laminar box.
The monotonic behavior of the Skopje sand was investigated under monotonic triaxial
compression in drained and undrained conditions but are not focus on this study.
Table 2. Performed triaxial tests

53
Figure 2. CSR vs number of cyclic to initiate liquefaction for Skopje sand compared to
Toyoura sand
During the element tests, emphasis was given on the relative density Dr of the soil samples
as one of the key parameters in shaking table test modeling. Figure 3 present the results from
the performed triaxial tests for CSR=0.25 and different relative densities of 40 %, 55 % and
75%. The presented graphs clearly show the liquefaction development in the Skopje sand by
axial strain development and accumulation of excess pore pressure. The obtained graphs
emphasise the soil liquefaction development of the Skopje sand initiated by axial strain
development and accumulation of excess pore pressure.
It can be noted that failure in all the cases of loose and dense samples is governed by
cumulative development of axial strain rather than pore pressure generation. It seems that the
sand demonstrates a “cyclic mobility” behavior. For the same cyclic stress ratio, the number
of cycles to reach liquefaction increases as the soil density increases.
54
Figure 3. Results from cyclic test on Skopje sand for Dr = 40%, 55% and 70%, CSR=0.25
1-G EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
A laminar box is a container which allows ‘free’ horizontal movement of soil model and it is
placed on a shaking table platform to simulate wave propagation during earthquakes through
a soil layer of finite thickness (Taylor et al. 1994). The laminar box described in this paper is
originally designed to be used for investigation of different kinds of geo-models on the
shaking table in the Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology – IZIIS,
Skopje, Macedonia (Figure 4). A series of tests on the shaking table in IZIIS were performed
on one homogenous sand model installed in the laminar box. The main goals of the performed
tests (Table 23), besides to test the behavior of the laminar box with sand inside and to
confirm the design concepts, were to simulate liquefaction phenomena and to observe the
physical measurements such as accelerations, displacements and pore pressure development
inside the sand.
The performance of the laminar box during the shaking was satisfactory and the results
confirmed that the design criteria were fulfilled and that the laminar box could be used in
further model testing on geo-models. The results proved the shear beam type response of the
soil simulating the free-field conditions and the effectiveness of the laminar box system for
55
1-g table tests. Accelerometers (ACC), LVDTs and Pore water pressure transducers (PWP)
were used to measure physical quantities. The instrumentation scheme is given in Figure 5.
Table 4. Description of the shaking table tests

Test Type Frequency Amplitude Duration
name
T_01 Harmonic 2Hz 0.05g 12 seconds
T_02 Harmonic 2 Hz 0.1g 12 seconds
T_03 Harmonic 2 Hz 0.2g 12 seconds
Figure 4. The constructed laminar box
216
82
16
20
Sand surface LVDT1
10cm
PWP1 ACC1
10cm
20
10cm
lp11 ACC11 PWP2 ACC2 LVDT2
10cm
10cm
PWP3 ACC3 ACC7
ACC14
146
10cm
150
130
10cm
lp6 ACC12 PWP4 ACC4 ACC8 LVDT3
10cm
10cm
PWP5 ACC5
10cm
lp2 ACC13 LVDT4
10cm
PWP6 ACC6
ACC10 20
ACC9
170 270
Figure 5. Instrumentation scheme of the laminar box

56
Results showed that the input acceleration matches exactly the acceleration measured at the
base plate of the laminar box. From the observation of the acceleration recordings on the
frame and the soil and their comparison (Figure 6 a)) it can be concluded that the soil and the
laminar box vibrate simultaneously and have the same acceleration input from the shaking
table. When analyzing these graphs, the exact time of manifestation of liquefaction is clearly
shown. At the beginning of the test until the initiation of liquefaction, the acceleration time
history of the frame and the soil matches perfectly. After the initiation of liquefaction, the
period of vibration elongates and the acceleration tends to zero.
The liquefaction depth in each shaking test was estimated based on the measured pore water
pressures, acceleration and displacements. The number of cycles required to cause
liquefaction increase with the increase of the relative density. The general trends of pore
water pressure changes are similar to those obtained in the shaking tests by others presented
in literature. When compared to the acceleration time history, the pore water pressure
development shows good correlation with the liquefaction occurrence in a way that pore
pressure development reaches the value of the effective stresses when acceleration starts to
decrease and the period of the soil starts to elongate (Figure 6 b). This is another prove that
the laminar box is appropriate and can simulate liquefaction phenomena. It is worth
mentioning that besides the computational results, visible manifestation of liquefaction
represented by sand boils had been observed during the shaking.
Figure 6. a) Comparison of acceleration on soil and frame (0.05g) b) Manifestation of

liquefaction – acceleration and excess PWP time response of soil at depth -50cm (0.05g)
57
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, part of the comprehensive experimental research on a new type of sand
performed to upgrade the understanding of the dynamic behaviour of cohesionless soil is
presented.Strong efforts have been made at Laboratory for Dynamics of soils and foundations
at IZIIS, Skopje to design and install medium size laminar container for research studies in
the field of earthquake geotechnical engineering. Particular attention have been made towards
boundary conditions that new laminar container should satisfy. The unique design of laminar
rings and system of rollers overcome some of the shortcomings experienced at previous
laminar containers.
Experimental element program have been defined to obtain necessary data for dynamic
properties and liquefaction susceptibility of sand from Vardar’s river terraces, named Skopje
sand.. Based on the detailed element and model testing program, it can be concluded that the
natural alluvial sand is highly sensitive to void parameters which under specific stress
conditions can demonstrate liquefaction potential and development of large deformation.
This sand is representative for the alluvial deposits around the Vardar River and the
performed investigations can be good basis for further definition and higher awareness of the
liquefaction hazard in Republic of Macedonia.
Acknowledgments
The research and the design of the laminar box was supported by the European FP7 Project
UREDITEME REGPOT-2008-1 (Upgrading of Research Equipment for Dynamic Testing of
Large Scale Models), grant no. 230099. This support is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES:
Bojadjieva J. (2015). Dynamic Behavior Of Saturated Cohesionless Soils Based On Element And 1-G
Experiments, PhD Thesis, Ss. Cyril and Methodius: Institute of Earthquake Engineering and
Engineering Seismology.
Cubrinovski, Misko et al.(2010). "Geotechnical reconnaissance of the 2010 Darfield (New Zealand)
earthquake." (2010).
Cvetanovska J. et al. (2013). Sand characterization for experimental studies on liquefaction
phenomena. ICEGE Conference, from case history to practice in honour of prof. Kenji
Ishihara, Istanbul 2013
Sesov V. (2003). Dynamic behavior of potentially nonstable layers and application of a model for
decreasing the seismic risk of liquefaction occurrence. PhD Thesis (2003). University Ss.
Cyril and Methodius-Skopje, Macedonia
Tatsuoka et al. (1986). “Cyclic undrained triaxial and torsional shear strength of sands for different
sample preparation methods” Soils and Foundations Vol.26 No.3 23-41
58
Taylor C.A., Dar A.R., Crew A.J.(1994). “Shaking table modelling of seismic geotechnical
problems”, Proceeding of the 10th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering ,
Balkema, 1995: 441-446.
Alper Turan, Sean D. Hinchberger, et al. (2009). Design and commissioning of a laminar soil
container for use on small shaking tables, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29:
(2009) 404-414.
Ueng, T. S. (2010). "Shaking Table Tests for Studies of Soil Liquefaction and Soil-Pile Interaction."
Geotechnical Engineering Journal of the SEAGS &AGSSEA 41(1)
59
Pregledni rad
624.13:929 ɌɟɪɰɚɝɢɄɮɨɧ
KARL TERZAGHI I INŽENJERSKA

GEOLOGIJA, GEOMORFOLOGIJA, MEHANIKA
STIJENA I TUNELOGRADNJA
Ivan Vrkljan
*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW6YHXþLOLãWDX5LMHFL 5DGPLOH0DWHMþLü5LMHND
Hrvatska, ivan.vrkljan@uniri.hr
REZIME
Karl Terzaghi, NRMLMHXJODYQRPSR]QDWNDRRVQLYDþPHKDQLNHWOD, dao je vitalni doprinos i
drugim poljima geotehnike kao što su inženjerska geologija, mehanika stijena,
geomorfologija i tunelogradnja. %LR MH XþLWHOM NRQ]XOWDQt i autor brojnih knjiga i raznih
publikacija. 8OLWHUDWXULVHXJODYQRPLVWLþH7HU]DJKLMHYGRSULQRVPHKDQLFLWODGRNMHPDQMH
poznat njegov doprinos GUXJLP SROMLPD JHRWHKQLþNRJ LQåHQMHUVWYD. Tijekom boravka u
+UYDWVNRM L 7HU]DJKL MH SURXþDYDR PRUIRORJLMX ORNDOQRJ WHUHQD L QDNRQ YUOR
kratkog vremena formulirao je teoriju o genezi krških polja. 5DGLPD]DFLOMSULEOLåLWLVWUXþQRM
i znanstvenoj javnosti Terzaghijeve aktivnosti na ovim poljima geotehnike i geologije.
./-8ý1(5(ý,Terzaghi, inženjerska geologija, geomorfologija, mehanika stijena,

tunelogradnja.
KARL TERZAGHI AND ENGINEERING GEOLOGY,

GEOMORPHOLOGY, ROCK MECHANICS AND
TUNNELLING
ABSTRACT
Karl Terzaghi, best known as founder of soil mechanics, also made vital contributions to
other fields of geotechnics as engineering geology, rock mechanics, geomorphology and
tunneling. He was a teacher, consultant, and author. Although Terzaghi’s contribution to soil
mechanics is widely emphasized in literature, his contribution to other fields of geotechnical
engineering, is far less known. During stay in Croatia 1909 and 1910 Terzaghi studied
morphology of local terrain and, after a very brief period of study, he formulated theory on
genesis of karst poljes.The objective of this paper is to familiarize professional and scientific
community with Terzaghi’s activities in these fields of geotechnics and geology.
KEY WORDS: Terzaghi, engineering geology, geomorphology, rock mechanics,

tunnelling.
60
UVOD
Karl Terzaghi MHURÿHQu obitelji duge vojne tradicije. Rodio se u Pragu 02. listopada 1883.
gdje mu je otac, pukovnik Anton von Terzaghi (1839-1890), služio u Carskoj vojsci. Terzaghi
je u Pragu proveo samo nekoliko godina jer mu je otac 1887. umirovljen i obitelj se seli u
Graz. Karlov otac umire tri godine poslije kada je Karl imao samo 7 godina. Tako je njegov
djed po majci, Karl Andreas Eberle, u 67-oj godini postao voditeOMNXüDQVWYD3o ovom je
djedu Terzaghi dobio ime. Odrastanje uz djeda snažno je utjecalo na kasniji Terzaghijev
život. U svojoj autobiografiju, Terzaghi (1932) o djedu kaže: „A primjer mi je bio moj djed
.DUO(EHUOHLVNXVDQLHQHUJLþDQLQåHQMHUVWDUHãNROH«1MHJRYDMDka, bistra sposobnost i
njegov karakter utjecali su na moju osobnost i razvoj sve do zrele dobi.“
U skladu s obiteljskom tradicijom, Terzaghi se školovao u vojnim školama. Vojne škole su

RMDþDOH .DUORYR WLMHOR L GXãX SULKYDWLR MH GLVFLSOLQX L naporan rad u svim uvjetima.
Ä6SDUWDQVNLQDþLQåLYRWDLYLVRNRFLMHQMHQRREUD]RYDQMHYRGLOLVXGRRGJRMD]DSRGQRãHQMH
tjelesnih napora koji su bili temelj vježbe mog daljnjeg zvanja kao inženjera.“ (Terzaghi
(1932).
Po završetku srednje škole, upisuje studij strojarstva QD 7HKQLþNRP VYHXþLOLãWX X *UD]X
Tijekom studiranja bio je vrlo prisan s profesorom Ferdinandom Wittenbauerom (1857-
:LWWHQEDXHUQLMHELRWLSLþDQVYHXþLOLãQLSURIHVRUELRMHXþLWHOMLVWUDåLYDþLSMHVQLN
Ä0RM XþLWHOM SRVWDR PL MH RþLQVki prijatelj i ispovjednik.“ Ovaj ga je profesor spasio od
izbacivanja s fakulteta nakon što je Terzaghi u šali napadao i zlostavljao policajca u gradskom
parku :LWWHQEDXHU MH SRGVMHWLR XSUDYX )DNXOWHWD GD VX X FLMHORM SRYLMHVWL 7HKQLþNRJ
VYHXþLOLãWDX*UD]XL]EDþHQDVDPRWULVWXGHQWD Nikola Tesla, Riegler i još jedan. Kasnije je
1LNROD7HVODL]XPLRPRWRUQDL]PMHQLþQXVWUXMX$&PRWRU i mnoge druge svari koje su
promijenile svijet5LHJOHUMHVWYRULRSDUQXWXUELQXDRQDMWUHüLMHELRYRGHüLDUKLWHNWFUNYHQH
DUKLWHNWXUH X 1MHPDþNRM :LWWHQEDXHU MH ]DNOMXþLR GD IDNXOWHW QLMH XVSMHãDQ SUL RGDELUX
studenata koje treba izbaciti.
7HU]DJKL MH ELR ]DKYDODQ 7HKQLþNRP VYHXþLOLãWX na znanju koje je stekao tijekom studija.
3RKDÿDR MH WHþDMHYH L QD GUXJLP IDNXOWHWLPD 6YHXþLOLãWD X *UD]X XNOMXþXMXüL ILOR]RILMX
eksperimentalnu psihologiju, povijest umjetnosti, astronomiju i drugo. Diplomirao je s
ocjenom vrlo dobar 1904. u 21 godini života.
Nakon diplomiranja radio je nekoliko mjeseci kao volonter u tvornici strojeva u Andritzu, i
kako kaže u svom životopisu, uskoro je shvatio da u pozivu inženjera strojarstva nije
pronašao nikakvo zadovoljstvo (Terzaghi, 1932). Tako se TerzaJKLRNUHüHJUDÿHYLQDUVWYX
kako PX MH WR GMHG SUHSRUXþLR SULMH XSLVD QD IDNultet ali ga on nije poslušao. Nakon
jednogodišnjeg vojnog služenja, YUDWLR VH QD 7HKQLþNR VYHXþLOLãWH X *UD]X JGMH MH X]
dopuštenje djeda, jednu godinu studirao geologiju kao i elemente mostova i željeznica.
Terzaghi se 1906. zDSRãOMDYD X JUDÿHYLQVNRM WYUWNL $GROI %DURQ 3LWWHO %HWRQEDX–

8QWHUQHKPXQJX%HþX]DNRMXSUHX]Lma poslove u Rumunjskoj i Donjoj Austriji. U svojoj
autobiografiji Terzaghi (1932) je zapisao: „U ovoj tvrtki pronašao sam malu skupinu mladih
61
L YLVRNR PRWLYLUDQLK LQåHQMHUD PHÿX NRMLPD L GU 0 0LODQNRYLüD NRML MH NDVQLMH VWHNDR
blistavo ime kao astronom i klimatolog.“ 0LOXWLQ 0LODQNRYLü MH VUSVNL JHRIL]LþDU
PDWHPDWLþDUDVWURQRPLJUDÿHYLQVNLLQåHQMHU5RGLRVHX'DOMXXWDGDãQMRM.UDOMHYLQL
Hrvatskoj i Slavoniji, u okviru Austro-Ugarske Monarhije. Osam godina škole završio je u
2VMHþNRMUHDOQRMJLPQD]LML1L7HU]DJKLQL0LODQNRYLüQLVXELOL]DGRYROMQLSRVORPNRMLVX
REDYOMDOLXRYRMJUDÿHYLQVNRMWYUWNL7HU]DJKLQLMHELR]DGRYROMDQMHUQLMHRVMHüDRQDSUHGDN
QD SROMX WHKQLþNH JHRORJLMH D 0LODQNRYLü VH SDN åHOLR SRVYHWLWL WHPHOMQLP LVWUDåLYDQMLPD
JHRIL]LNH7DNRRERMLFDQDSXãWDMXWYUWNXXNRMRMVX]DMHGQRUDGLOL0LODQNRYLüRGOD]L
X6UELMXD7HU]DJKLX+UYDWVNX7DGDVHMRãQLMHPRJORSUHWSRVWDYLWLNDNRüHQMLKGYRMLFD
RVWYDULWLYUKXQVNHXVSMHKHVYDNLXVYRPHSRGUXþMX
0LODQNRYLü MH JRGLQH SULKYDWLR SRQXÿHQR PMHVWR YRGLWHOMD NDWHGUH ]D SULPLMHQMHQX
PDWHPDWLNX6YHXþLOLãWDX%HRJUDGX0LODQNRYLüHYRLPHMHQDMSR]QDWLMHSRQMHJRYRMWHRULMLR
OHGHQLPGRELPDNRMDMHSRYH]DODYDULMDFLMH=HPOMLQHRUELWHLGXJRURþQHNOLPDWVNHSURPMHQH
sada poznate kao MilankRYLüHYLFLNOXVL8mro 1958. godine u Beogradu gdje je i sahranjen.
2VWDYLR MH RSRUXNX VD åHOMRP GD QMHJRYL SRVPUWQL RVWDFL EXGX SUHEDþHQL X 'DOM QMHJRYR
URGQRPMHVWRãWRMHLXþLQMHQRJRGLQH6YXGRNXPHQWDFLMXNRMDJRYRULRQMegovom
]QDQVWYHQRPUDGXRVWDYLRMH6USVNRMDNDGHPLMLQDXNDLXPHWQRVWL5RGQDNXüDRYRJYHOLNRJ
znanstvenika pretvorena je u Kulturni i znanstveni centar „Milutin 0LODQNRYLüX'DOMX.
Život Karla Terzaghija i njegov i doprinos geotehnici opisan je u brojnim publikacijama.

Njegovi suvremenici napisali su dvije knjige koje doprinose boljem poznavanju ovog genija.
Prvu je knjigu objavio profesor Richard Edwin Goodman (University of California, Berkeley,
USA) pod naslovom: Karl Terzaghi-The Engineer as Artist (Goodman 1999). Ralph B. Peck
X SUHGJRYRUX RYH NQMLJH QDYRGL GD MH WR SUYD VYHREXKYDWQD NULWLþND ELRJUDILMD .DUOD
Terzaghija (Dunnicliff and Peck Young, 2006). Drugo je knjigu napisao profesor Reint de
Boer (Universität Essen), pod naslovom: The Engineer and the Scandal (de Boer, 2010). Ova
NQMLJDGDMHSUHJOHGWHãNRJVSRUDL]PHÿXSURIHVRUD7HU]DJKLja i profesora Paula Fillungera
koji je traJLþQR]DYUãLRVDPRXERMVWYRPSURIHVRUD)LOOXQJHUDLQMHJRYHVXSUXJHMargarete
Gregoritsch.
Njegovo temeljno djelo “Erdbaumechanik auf bodenphysikalischer grundlage” (Soil

mechanics based on Soil Phyisics) (Leipzig u. Wien, F. Deuticke, 1925.) još uvijek se smatra
MHGQLP RG NODVLND QD RYRP SROMX 2EMDYD RYH NQMLJH ãLURP VYLMHWD VPDWUD VH URÿHQMem
moderne mehanike tla. Bio je prvi koji je sveobuhvatno istražio inženjerska svojstva tla.
6WYRULRMHLOLSULODJRGLRYHüLQXWHRULMVNLKNRQFHSDWDSRWUHEQLK]DUD]XPLMHYDQMHLSUHGYLÿDQMH
ponašanja tla. Osmislio je glavne tehnike primjene znanstvenih metoda pri projektiranju i
L]JUDGQMLWHPHOMDL]HPOMDQLKJUDÿHYLQD%UDQGO, 1983a).
GeotehQLþNRLQåHQMHUVWYRNRPELQLUDPHKDQLNXWODPHKDQLNXVWLMHQDLLQåHQMHUVNXJHRORJLMX
Doprinos Karla Terzaghija mehanici tla je ogroman. =DSRþHR MH PRGHUQX PHKDQLNX Wla
VYRMLPWHRULMDPDNRQVROLGDFLMHERþQLPSULWLVFLPDWODQRVLYRVWLi VWDELOQRãüXWOD0HÿXWLP
7HU]DJKL VH EDYLR L GUXJLP SROMLPD JHRWHKQLþNRJ LQåHQMHUVWYD NDR ãWR VX LQåHQMHUVND
geologija, mehanika stijena, tunelogradnja, geomorfologija. Bio je XþLWHOMSURIHVRUPHKDQLNH
tla i inženjerske geologije) na Harvardu, MIT-X%HþX%HUOLQX7H[DVX,llionisu i drugim
62
VYHXþLOLãWLPD%LRMHWHRUHWLþDULGDRMHEURMQDteorijska rješenja. Bio je i praNWLþDU, QDMþHãüH

kao konzultant ili projektant na brojnim JHRWHKQLþNLPSURMHNWLPD.
Važna razdoblja u Terzaghijevom životu su (Brandl, 1983): 1883-1904: Djetinjstvo i

obrazovanje; 1904-19016: prvi poslovi (Austrija, Rumunjska, Hrvatska, Rusija, Sjedinjene
$PHULþNH 'UåDYH; 1916-1925: Turska; 1925-1929: SjedinjeQH $PHULþNH 'UåDYH; 1929-
1938: Wien, Austrija; 1938-6MHGLQMHQH$PHULþNH'UåDYH. Terzaghi je preminuo 25.
listopada 1963. (Winchester, Massachusetts, SAD) 2 QMHPX NDR þRYMHNX LQåHQMHUX
znanstveniku, umjetniku VYMHGRþH QMHJRYL PODÿL VXUDGQLFL NRML VX LPDOL þDVW L VUHüX
VXUDÿLYDWLVRYLPJHQLMHP
"Malo je ljudi u životu imalo toliki utjecaj na svoju profesiju kao što je to uþLQLR .DUO
7HU]DJKLQDJUDÿHYLQDUstvo i inženjersku geologiju.“ (Casagrande, 1960, 1964). „Volim se
VMHüDWL.DUODSUHPDNRPHVDPLPDRWDNYRSRãWRYDQMHLGRLVWDprivrženost, a o kojem od svih
ljudi koje sam ikad upoznao, bez oklijevanja kažem da je bio genije." (Glosop, 1964).
Na NorvHãNRP JHRWHKQLþNRP LQVWLWXWX nalazi se Memorijalna knjižnica Karla Terzaghija

(Bjerum, L., Øiseth, 1971) NRMD þXYD RULJLQDOQH UXNRSLVH L GUXJX JUDÿX 2YD MH NQMLåQLFD
autoru ustupila pisma koje je Terzaghi pisao profesoru Wittenbaueru tijekom boravka u
Hrvatskoj.
TERZAGHI I INŽENJERSKA GEOLOGIJA
Terzaghijeva ljubav prema prirodi u ranoj mladosti prešla je u ljubav prema geologiji u
RGUDVORMGREL7LMHNRPãNROVNLKSUD]QLNDRELOD]LRMHYLVRNH$OSHVJHRORãNLPþHNLüHPXUXFL.
Kako je sam znao kazati, nije postojalo niti jedno polje prirodnih znanosti koje nije upoznao
bar malo. 3XQRMHSLVDRRXOR]LJHRORJDSULJUDÿHQMXJHRWHKQLþNLK objekta kao što su brane,
WXQHOLLVOLþQRPri tome je isticao potrebu tijesne suradnje JHRORJDLJUDÿHYLQVNRJLQåHQMHUD
koji svaki na sYRM QDþLQ YLGL SUREOHPH JUDÿHQMD Ä8WYUÿLYDQMH JHRORãNLK XYMHWD SULMH
L]JUDGQMH QHNRJ ]QDþDMQRJ WXQHOD ]DKWMHYD DQJDåPDQ NRPSHWHQWQRJ L LVNXVQRJ JHRORJD
*UDÿHQMHWXQHODEH]SUHWKRGQLKGHWDOMQLKJHRORãNLKLVWUDåLYDQMDQLMHQLãWDPDQMHUL]LþQR nego
izgradnja brane na terenu koji nije adekvatno istražen.“ (Terzaghi, 1946).
*RYRUHüL R RGQRVX JUDÿHYLQVNRJ LQåHQMHUD L JHRORJD 7HU]DJKL (1946) kaže: “Kako bi

inženjer koji gradi tunel iskoristio podatke iz geološkog izvještaja, on mora imati bar
UXGLPHQWDUQR]QDQMHRJHRORJLML6GUXJHVWUDQHJHRORJPRUDELWLIDPLOLMDUDQVSUDNWLþQRP
XSRWUHERPUH]XOWDWDGRNRMLKMHGRãDRýLQMHQLFHRGYHOLNRJ]QDQVWYHQog interesa mogu biti
QHYDåQHVSUDNWLþQRJVWDMDOLãWDLREUQXWR3URIHVLRQDOQLWUHQLQJVIHUHLQWHUHVDSDþDNLMH]LN
RYHGYLMHRVREHYMHURMDWQRüHVHMDNRUD]OLNRYDWL=DWRJHRORJWUHEDXL]YMHãWDMLPDLVNOMXþLWL
sve one termine koji nisu primjereni inženjerskom projektu koji je predmet istraživanja.“
.DUO 7HU]DJKL XWHPHOMLWHOM PHKDQLNH WOD WDNRÿHU MH GDR YLWDOQL GRSULQRV LQåHQMHUVNRM
JHRORJLMLNDRXþLWHOMNRQ]XOWDQWLDXWRU.DRSDåOMLYSURPDWUDþSULURGHSRNXãDRMHUD]XPMHWL
geologiju istraživanog teUHQDLSRVWDRXPMHWQLNXSULODJRÿDYDQMXVYRMLKSURMHNDWDJHRORãNRM
63
stvarnosti i neizvjesQRVWLNRMDVHQHPRåHL]EMHüL(Goodman, 2003; Einstein, 1991; Goodman,

2002).
Iako je Karl Terzaghi najpoznatiji po svojim publikacijama o mehanici i inženjerstvu tla,

brojni su njegovi zapisi i publikacije o inženjerskoj geologiji i mehanici stijena. Tijekom
MHGQRJRGLãQMH YRMQH VOXåEH X SMHãDþNRM SXNRYQLML SUHYHR MH GMHORPLþQR QD straži a
GMHORPLþQRQDRGVOXåHQMXND]QL „Manual on field geology“ od Archibalda Geikiea, direktora
Britanskog geološkog instituta. Ovo je djelo objavio 1906. godine. Nezadovoljan s prvim
SULMHYRGRPSULSUHPLRMHQRYRL]GDQMHXNRMHMHXNOMXþLRJHRORãNHXvjete u Austriji. Tijekom
VYRJ EHþNRJ UD]GREOMD REMDYio je zajedno s Redlichom i Kampeom knjigu „Engineering
Geology“ u Auerbach-Hort-ovom 3ULUXþQLNX za fizikalnu i inženjersku mehaniku" (Redlich
at al, 1929). Terzaghi je napisao poglavlje „Mechanical Properties of Fills Sediments and
Gel-type Structures“ (0HKDQLþNDsvojstva nasipa, sedimenata i želatinastih struktura).
9Hü JRGLQH SRþHR MH SULSUHPDWL XGåEHQLN R LQåHQMHUVNRM JHRORJLML DOL QMHJRYR MH
dovršavanje ostalo „željni san“ do kraja života. Njegov san o završetku autoritativnog
udžbenika o primijenjenoj inženjerskoj geologiji koju je predavao na Harvardu, nikada nije
ostvaren. Uvijek je postojao neki aspekt koji se razvijao i vrijeme mu je jednostavno
nestajalo. U jednoj je fazi profesor Don Deere pristao biti koautor. Kasnije je Deere tražio od
supruge Ruth Doggett Terzaghi (1903–1992), koja je bila profesionalna geologinja, da
privede projekt kraju. Nažalost, ti planovi nisu ostvareni (Goodman, 2003).
(a) (b)
Slika 1. (a) Karl i 5XWK7HU]DJKLSURXþDYDMXNDUWX, 1934. (b) Terzaghi na gradilištu brane Chicopee,
1923. (de Boer, 2010)
Figure 1. (a) Karl and Ruth von Terzaghi studying a map, 1934. (b) Terzaghi at Chicopee dam site,
1923. (de Boer, 2010)
Terzaghi je 1961. objavo važan rad pod naslovom „Inženjerska geologija na radnom mjestu
LXXþLRQLFL³ (Terzaghi 1961)JGMHMHLVWDNQXW]QDþDMLQåHQMHUVNHJHRORJLMHXLQåHQMHUVWYXWOD
L VWLMHQD 7HU]DJKL MH REMDVQLR YDåQX UD]OLNX L]PHÿX NRQVtrukcijskog inženjerstva i
64
primiMHQMHQHPHKDQLNHWODQDVOMHGHüLQDþLQ"Mnogi se problemi konstrukcijskog inženjerstva

PRJXULMHãLWLVDPRQDWHPHOMXSRGDWDNDVDGUåDQLKXXGåEHQLFLPDDSURMHNWDQWPRåHSRþHWL
NRULVWLWLWHSRGDWNHþLPIRUPXOLUDVYRMSUREOHP6XSURWQRWRPHXSULPLMHQMHQRMPHKDQLFLWOD
prije nego što se postupci opisani u udžbenicima mogu sigurno koristiti potrebno je duboko
razmišljati. Ako inženjer zadužen za izradu zemljanih radova nema potrebnu geološku obuku,
PDãWX L ]GUDY UD]XP QMHJRYR ]QDQMH R PHKDQLFL WOD PRåH XþLQLWL YLãH ãWHWH QHJR NRULVWL
Umjesto da koristi mehaniNXWODRQüHMH]ORXSRWULMHELWL"
7HU]DJKL MH SUDNWLFLUDR LQåHQMHUVNX JHRORJLMX QH NDR SURIHVLRQDOQL JHRORJ YHü NDR
JUDÿHYLQVNL LQåHQMHU NRML MH R]ELOMQR VKYDWLR VYRMH RGJRYRUQRVWL L VKYDWLR JHRORãND
istraživanja i geološko razmišljanje kao vrlo potrebne korake u postizanju inženjerskih
rješenja. .DNRELVHL]YXNODPDNVLPDOQDNROLþLQDLQIRUPDFLMDiz minimalne NROLþine bušenja
i kopanja, prije svega potrebno je dobiti jasnu predodžbu o geološkoj povijesti lokacije
brane. Ako je poznata povijest lokaliteta, može se konstruirati okvirni geološki profil. Iz
geološkog profila se mogu prepoznati WRþNH QD NRMLPD VH PRJX GRELWL QDMYUMHGQLMH
informacije. Probne bušotine služe samo provjeri je li profil ispravan i kako bi se KLSRWHWLþNH
JUDQLFHL]PHÿXIRUPDFLMDzamijenile pravim.“(Iz izvještaja o Ox-Bow Dam, Michigan, June
12, 1928) (Goodman 2003).
U vrijeme dok je bio predsjednik ISSMFE-a (1936-1957), Terzaghi je postao u potpunosti

svjestan granica koje je postavila priroda u svezi s teoretskim rješavanjem JUDÿHYLQVNLK
problema. On je uvijek naglašavao da je teorija sama za sebe potpuno nedostatna za
rješavanje WHKQLþNLK problema vezanih za tlo. Terzaghiju je matematika bila samo sredstvo
za postizanje nekog cilja, tj. sredstvo koje se koristi kao podrška pri iznalaženju implikacija
nekog IL]LþNRJkoncepta. Prema tome, on je pokušavao premostiti raskorak L]PHÿXteorije i
prakse (Brandl: 1995): 3RYHüDYDQMH WRþQRVWL kroz daljnji razvoj naših teoretskih metoda
može se SRVWLüLsamo u nekoliko SRGUXþMDjer su posljedice nekih geoloških svojstava – koja
nam neizbježno ostaju nepoznata - u YHüLQLVOXþDMHYD]QDþDMQLMHod grešaka do kojih dolazi
u našim teoretskim postupcima. Zbog toga je potrebna suradnja velikog broja inženjera koji
aktivno sudjeluju u graÿHQMX i koji su, osim toga, sposobni obavljati teoretska i
eksperimentalna istraživanja potrebna za jasno sagledavanje þLQMHQLFD
3ULPMHU7HU]DJKLMHYRJSULVWXSDLOXVWULUDQMHJRYRL]YMHãüH]DYODVQLNHNDPHQRORPDYDSQHQFD
u blizini Sao Paula, Brazil (TerzaJKL9DSQHQDFVHRþLWRQDOD]LRXMH]JULDQWLNOLQDOH
sa škriljavcima (schist) u bokovima. Prije rasprave o projektu dubokog iskopa,Terzaghi je
QDSUDYLRNDUDNWHULVWLþQHSRSUHþQHSUHVMHNHNDNRELYLGLRãWRVHPRåHQDXþLWLRPRUIRORJLMLL
svojstvima osnRYQHVWLMHQVNHPDVHLGHEHORJSRNULYDþD (slika 3).
Tijekom posljednjih 10 do 15 godina života Terzaghi se uglavnom bavio savjetodavnim

XVOXJDPD QD YHOLNLP SURMHNWLPD EUDQD L WXQHOD L SUHGDYDQMLPD QD VYHXþLOLãWX +DUYDUG
Predavao je dva predmeta, primijenjenu mehaniku tla i inženjersku geologiju. Posebnu je
SDåQMXSRVYHüLYDRSUHGDYDQMLPDL]LQåHQMHUVNHJHRORJLMHNRMDVXWHPHOMHQDQDSUDNWLþQLP
SULPMHULPDJUDÿHQMDEUDQDLWXQHOD
65
6PDWUDMXüL GD QMHJRY HQJOHVNL MH]LN QLMH GRYROMQR GREDU QLMH GR]YROLR GD se njegova
predavanja snimaju. Ipak je na nagovor Arthura Casagrandea dopustio da Casagrande snimi
QMHJRYR SRVOMHGQMH XYRGQR SUHGDYDQMH L] LQåHQMHUVNH JHRORJLMH QD +DUYDUGX YHOMDþH
1957. Ova je snimka dugo godina bila zaboravljena sve dok profesor Toshinobu Akagi
(Department Civil Engineering, Toyo University, Kawagoe, Saitama, Japan) nije, uz dopuštenje Pecka,
REMDYLRWUDQVNULSW7HU]DJKLMHYDSUHGDYDQMDLRPRJXüLRGLVWULEXFLMXDXGLRVQLPNHSUHGDYDQMD$NDJL
2000). Na audio zapisu nalazi se Peckov uvod i Terzaghijevo predavanje u trajanju od 26 min.
Transkript predavanja su napravili Ralph. B. Peck i +HUEHUW2,UHODQGVD,OOLQRLVVYHXþLOLãWD
6OLND3URIHVRU7HU]DJKLNDRSUHGDYDþQD+DUDYUGXGH%RHU
Fig 2. Professor Terzaghi lecturing at Harvard, 1950 (de Boer, 2010).
1DVDPRPSRþHWNXSUHGDYDQMD7HU]DJKLJRYRULVWXGHQWLPDÄ7HþDMLQåHQMHUVNHJHRORJLMHNRML
GDQDVSRþLQMHþLQLGLRYDãHREXNHLLPDYUORELWQXXORJXXSRGUXþMX]HPOMDQLKUDGRYD³ Pred
kraj predavanja TerzDJKLJRYRULRQHNLPVOXþDMHYLPDL]SUDNVHNDNRELQDJODVLRSUDNWLþQL
]QDþDMLQåHQMHUVNHJHRORJLMH1DåDORVWþDNLGDQDVRYH7HU]DJKLMHYHSRUXNHVH]DQHPDUXMX
þHVWLP SURMHNWLUDQMHP JHRWHKQLþNLK JUDÿHYLQD EH] Govoljnog poznavanja
inženjerskogeoloških karakteristika terena.
7HU]DJKLSUHGDYDQMD]DYUãDYDVRYLPUHþHQLFDPD Ä*ODYQLFLOMWHþDMDMHRWYRULWLYDãHRþLNDNR
EL VKYDWLOL XWMHFDM JHRORãNLK þLPEHQLND QD LQåHQMHUVNH ]DKYDWH L QD NRULVWL NRMH JHRORãNL
]DNOMXþFL PRJX GDWL SURMHNWX $NR XVSLMHWH VKYDWLWL Yažnost tog utjecaja, vaš interes i
NRPSHWHQFLMD ]D LQåHQMHUVNX JHRORJLMX QHSUHVWDQR üH UDVWL D RYD SUHGDYDQMD üH YDP GDWL
WUDMQLLYUORPRüDQSRWLFDM]DSURPDWUDQMHQDWHUHQX$OLDNRYLQHXVSLMHWHEROMHVHGUåLWH
SRGDOMH RG ]HPOMDQLK UDGRYD MHU YHüLQD JUHãDND QD WRP SRGUXþMX QDVWDMX NDR SRVOMHGLFD
LJQRULUDQMDJHRORãNLKþLPEHQLNDDQHJUHãDNDXSURUDþXQLPD³
66
Samo pola godine nakon što je održao posljednje predavanje iz inženjerske geologije na
+DUYDUGX 7HU]DJKL D 7HU]DJKL MH X þXYHQRP SUHGVMHGQLþNRP REUDüDQMX WLMHNRP
ýHWYUWH PHÿXQDURGQH NRQIHUHQFLMH R PHKDQLFL WOD L WHPHOMHQMX RGUåDQRM X /RQGRQX
kolovoza 1957. (Terzaghi, 1957) ponovio osnovne naglaske iz svog posljednjeg predavanja
studentima. Ä5D]PDWUDMXüLPQRãWYRNRULVQRJD]QDQMDNRMHMHILOWULUDORXPRMYODVWLWLVXVWDYL
koji je kristalizirao u zdravo-UD]XPVNRUDVXÿLYDQMHQDOD]LPGDVDGUåLMHGQXXncu geologije
na svaku funtu teorije konstrukcija i mehanike tla. Ta jedna unca geologije bitna je kao što
je kvasac u procesu fermentacije, ali predstavlja samo veoma mali dio širokoga polja koje
pokrivaju znanosti o zemlji..." Terzaghi još kaže: „Da bi se postigla kompetencija u
zemljanim radovima mora se živjeti s tlom. Mora ga se voljeti i promatrati njegovo ponašanje
QHVDPRXODERUDWRULMXQHJRWDNRÿHUQDWHUHQXNDNRELVHSRVWDOREOLVNLPRQLPDRGPQRJLK
svojstava koja se ne otkrivaju u zapisnicima bušenja i laboratorijskih pokusa. Iskustvo koje
se time VWMHþHVOLþQRje znanju koje poljoprivrednik s vremenom nakuplja o komadu zemlje
NRML YROL L REUDÿXMH³ I nastavlja: Ä-D VDP WDNRÿHU XVWDQRYLR WLMHNRP JRGLQD GD ]QDQMH
akumulirano u ljudskome mozgu nema SUDNWLþQH vrijednosti ako njegov vlasnik nema
moralne hrabrosti da se njime služi kao osnovom za RGOXþLYDQMHI na kraju, ja sam sve više
bio impresioniran YDåQRãüX da nikada ne propustim priliku ustanoviti, izravnim
promatranjem, razliku L]PHÿXSUHGYLÿenog i stvarnog ponašanja.“
Profesor Peter Kaiser iz Kanade, primio je 8. Müllerovu nagradu tijekom 14. ISRM kongresa
u Foz de Iguaçu (Brazil) u rujnu 2019. Müllerova nagrada je najviše priznanje koje ISRM
GRGMHOMXMH VYDNH þHWLUL JRGLQH ]D SRVHEQH GRSULQRse mehanici stijena i stijenskom
inženjerstvu. U predavanju koje je tom prilikom održao, profesor Kaiser (2019) SRWYUÿXMH
YDåQRVWJHRORJLMHQDVOLþDQQDþLQNDNRMHWRþLQLR7HU]DJKLPQRJRJRGLQDUDQLMH„Rješenje
nekog problema stijenskog inženjerstva mora uvažavati složenost i promjenjivost geologije
WHX]HWLXRE]LUSUDNWLþQRVWLHILNDVQRVWJUDGQMHLPRUDSUXåLWLVLJXUQXLXþLQNRYLWXSRWSRUX
VWLMHQDPD=DWRMHELWQRSUHGYLGMHWLLQåHQMHUVNRJHRORãNDLPHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYDVWLMHQVNHPDVH
i poQDãDQMH LVNRSD YHü X ID]L SURMHNWLUDQMD 6D SRYHüDQMHP REMHNWD UDVWH L RGJRYRUQRVW
JUDÿHYLQVNRJLQåHQMHUDLJHRORJD³
67
Slika 3. 3RSUHþQLSUHVMHFLNUR]3HUXVNDPHQRORPDEOL]X6DR3DXODNRMHMHQDSUDYLR7HU]DJKLL]

Terzaghijevog izvještaja od 20.10.1950) (Goodman, 2003)
Fig 3. Cross section through Perus Quarry near Sao Paulo made by Terzaghi (From Report on Perus
Quarry, October 20, 1950) (Goodman, 2003).
TERZAGHI I GEOMORFOLOGIJA
Terzaghi je imao godinu dana kada je Davis (1884) objavio svoju FLNOLþNXWHRULMX geneze
krških polja D VDPR GHVHWDN JRGLQD NDGD MH &YLMLü REMDYLR VYRMH NDSLWDOQR GMHOR Ä'DV
.DUVWSKDQRPHQ³ MHGQR RG QDM]QDþDMQLMLK QD SRGUXþMX LVWUDåLYDQMD NUãD &YLMLü 6D
SRGUXþMD 'LQDUVNRJ NUãD uvedeno je više pojmova X PHÿXQDURGQX WHUPLQRORJLMX D PHÿX
njima i polje, ponor, dolina, uvala, hum, jama, kamenica i mosor. Dok su se geomorfolozi
WRJDGREDEDYLOLLVNOMXþLYRJHRJUDILMRPLJHRPRUIRORJLMRP7HU]DJKLMHVWXGLUDRVWURMDUVWYR
YROLR JHRORJLMX L RGDEUDR JUDÿHYLQDUVWYR ]D VYRMX EXGXüX SURIHVLMX 7HU]DJKL GROD]L X
hrvatski krš 1909. gdje se bavi organiziranjem i realizacijom mnogobrojnih mjerenja i
izradom planova za iskorištenje hidro potencijala rijeke Gacke. Njegova velika ljubav prema
prirodi i kršu, potaknula ga je, da pored VYDNRGQHYQLKSRVORYDWHKQLþNHSULURGHUD]PLãOMDR
fenomenu nastanka polja.
68
7HU]DJKL MH LVWUDåLYDR ED]HQ RPHÿHQ YLVRNLP SODQLQDPD 9HOHELWRP 0DORP .DSHORP
9HOLNRP.DSHORPL3OMHãLYLFRPXNRPHVHQDOD]HGYDYHOLNDSROMD/LþNRL*DFNR
(a) (b)
Slika 4. (a) Karl Terzaghi u 24-oj godini (1907), dvije godine prije dolaska u Hrvatsku (Goodman,
E7HU]DJKLMHYHVNLFHJHRORãNLKGHWDOMDQD9HOHELWXQDSUDYOMHQHL]PHÿXLWUDYQMD
(Terzaghi 1909). Terzaghi je OLMHSRFUWDRDWRMHRþHNLYDRLRGVYRMLKVXUDGQLND
Figure 4. (a) Karl Terzaghi aged 24 (1907). (Goodman, 1999). (b) Terzaghi's sketches (1909) of
geological details (Velebit, April 1909). (Terzaghi 1909). Terzaghi was very skilled in drawing, and
he expected the same from his associates.
3URPDWUDMXüLULMHNX*DFNXNRMDWDMDQVWYHQRLXPLUXL]YLUHQDMHGQRPNUDMXSROMDOLMHQRWHþH
duž polja i jednako tako bešumno nestaje u ponorima na drugom kraju polja, Terzaghi (1913;
1958) je shvatio da teorija temeljeQD QD ULMHþQRM HUR]LML QH PRåH REMDVQLWL QDVWDQDN SROMD
8WYUGLRMHGDQHPDQD]QDNDPHKDQLþNHHUR]LMHNRMX]DJRYDUDMX&YLMLü (1893), Grund (1903)
i drugi. Rijeke u poljima nemaju dovoljno snage za takvo djelovanje, a da je takovog
djelovanja u prošlosti i ELOR PRUDR EL VH QDüL ULMHþQL QDQRV 7DNYLK QDQRVD QHPD Grund
uzrok nastajanja polja vidi i u tektonskim aktivnostima. On vidi polja kao ostatke zaravni
NRMHVXL]EMHJOHGLMHOMHQMHVSXãWDQMHPL]PHÿXQRUPDOQLKUDVMHGDQDQMLKRYXVDGDãQMXUD]LQX
(Terzaghi, 1958).
2GEDFXMXüLPRJXüQRVWGDVXSROMDSRVOMHGLFDULMHþQHHUR]LMHLWHNWRQVNLKDNWLYQRVWL7HU]DJKL
]DNOMXþXMHGDVHQDVWDQDNSROMDPRåHREMDVQLWLMHGLQRYUORL]UDåHQLPNRUR]LYQLPGMHORYDQMHP
vode na vapnenac koji se nalazi ispod humusnog pokrova šumom pokrivenih terena. Pri
srednjoj vlazi i umjerenoj temperaturi raspadaju se humusni sastojci pod utjecajem gljiva
WUXOMHQMDQDXJOMLþQXNLVHOLQXYRGXLDPRQLMDN7HU]DJKL2YR7HU]DJKLMHYR]DSDåDQMH
govori o vrlo snažnom kemijskom procesu NRML VH GRJDÿD XKXPXVQRP VORMX /RJLþDQMH
]DNOMXþDNGDVHYDSQHQFLSRGSRNURYRPKXPXVDEUåHRWDSDMXDLQWHQ]LWHWRWDSDQMDRYLVLR
GHEOMLQL L NYDOLWHWDPD KXPXVD NRQFHQWUDFLML YODJH WRSLYRVWL RGQRVQR þLVWRüL L JUDÿL
vapnenaca. Terzaghi (1913) je izUDþXQao da se u zapadnim hrvatskim krajevima vapnenac
ispod humusnog pokrova otapa brzinom od 0,25 mm na godinu, odnosno 25 cm za 1000
godina. S druge strane, na ogoljelim površina otopi se samo 1,4 cm za 1000 godina. Terzaghi
69
RYX SURFMHQX NDVQLMH SRYHüDva na 0,5 mm godišnje, odnosno na 50 cm za 1000

JRGLQD3ULWRPLVWLþHGDþDNLX]SUHWSRVWDYNXGDMHEU]LQDRWDSDQMDVDPRMHGQDSHWLQDRG
SUHWKRGQRQDYHGHQHEU]LQDRWDSDQMDLVSRGãXPVNRJSRNURYDMHMRãXYLMHNPQRJRYHüDRG
brzine otapanja gole stijene.
Slika 56KHPDWVNLSUHVMHNNUR]/LþNRL*DFNRSROMHL9HOHELWVNLNDQDOL]PHÿX6HQMDL6Y-XUMD
(Terzaghi, 1958).
Figure 5. Cross-section through poljes along southwestern boundary of interior basin and the Velebit
Channel between Senj (Zengg at that time) and Sveti Juraj (Terzaghi, 1958).
7HU]DJKLMHYD VH WHRULMDXNUDWNR PRåHRSLVDWL QD VOMHGHüLQDþLQ (slika 6): Prije formiranja
SROMD WHUHQ MH ELR SUHNULYHQ EXNRYLP ãXPDPD NRMH VX UDVOH QD KXPXVQRP SRNULYDþX
'MHORYDQMHYRGHNRMDSUROD]LNUR]KXPXVQLSRNURYGRYRGLGRQDVWDQNDJXVWRUDVSRUHÿHQLK
SRQLNDYDVDVWUPLPNRVLQDPDýLPGQRQHNHRGWLKSRQLNDYDGRVHJQHUD]LQXQDNRMRM dolazi
GR SRYUHPHQRJ SODYOMHQMD XVOLMHG SRVWRMHüLK KLGURJUDIVNLK XYMHWD ãXPVND YHJHWDFLMD
RGXPLUH1DNRQWRJDVHQDJORXVSRUDYDSURFHVRWDSDQMDVWLMHQHXSRSODYOMHQRPSRGUXþMX2G
WRJYUHPHQDQDGDOMHXWRPSRGUXþMXUD]LQDVWLMHQVNHPDVHXRSüHVHQHPLMHnja ili se mijenja
vrlo malo, dok se razina okolnog terena postupno spušta sve dok se i taj teren ne poplavi i ne
L]JXELVYRMãXPVNLSRNURY'UXJLPULMHþLPDUD]LQDWODXSROMX]DSUDYRMHNRWDQDNRMRMVH
površina stijenskog terena povremeno poplavljuje u sezoni velikih voda. Prema ovoj
koncepciji, polje smješteno na osnovnoj stijeni, nije nastalo kao rezultat djelovanja rijeke,
YHüVHULMHNDSRMDYLODQDNRQãWRVHVYDVWLMHQVNDPDVDRWRSOMHQDGMHORYDQMHPYRGHVSXVWLOD
do razine podzemne vode. Jedina aktivnost rijeke sastojala se u vrlo sporom produbljivanju
GQDNRULWDNUR]SURFHVRWDSDQMDþLPHQDVWDMHSOLWNRSURGXEOMHQMH7HU]DJKL
„Kad je kemijsko otapanje vapnenca ispod šumskog pokrova doseglo nivo podzemne vode,
XPMHVWRãXPHVXQDVWDOLPRþYDUQLdijelovi, a otapanje se zaustavilo. U tom smislu, produžena
JRWRYR YRGRUDYQD SROMD KUYDWVNRJ L KHUFHJRYDþNRJ NUãD SUHGVWDYOMDMX RNDPHQMHQX VOLNX
prijašnjeg nivoa podzemne vode gdje je zbog umiranja šumske vegetacije došlo do prestanka
kemijske erozije“ (Terzaghi, 1932).
7HU]DJKL MH REMDVQLR L QDVWDQDN KXPRYD NRML VH þHVWR QDOD]H X SROMLPD NDR RVDPOMHQD L
istaknuta uzvišenja. Humovi nisu sastavljeni od þYUãüLKstijena da bi se time moglo objasniti
70
njihovo nastajanje. Humovi su redovito istog sastava kao i okolica, zaostali su, jer su bili
manje L]ORåHQLNRUR]LML5RJOLü$NR]ERJQHNRJUD]ORJDGRÿHGRORNDOQRJXNODQMDQMD
površinskog tla na kosini prekrivenoj šumom, tada brzina ogoljenja izložene stijene postaje
neznatna. S druge strane, vapnenac prekriven šumom se otapa i šumski pokrov se sve više
spušta. Ima se dojam da humovi rastu iz polja.
Slika 6. Shematski prikaz geneze polja prema Terzaghijevoj teoriji. (a) Iz nekih razloga jedan dio
gorja je bez šume i humusnog sloja. (b) Kiseline nastale u humusnom sloju otapaju vapnenac 100
puta brže u odnosu na vapnenac koji nema šumski pokrov. (c) Kada se vapnenac otopi do razine
podzemne vode, umire šuma i formira se prvi dio polja. (d) Otapanje vapnenca u preostalom dijelu sa
šumskim pokrovom do razine podzemne vode kada se u cijelosti formira polje. Prikazan je period
plavljenja polja (Vrkljan, 2019).
Figure 6. 15. Schematic view of the genesis of poljes according to Terzaghi’s theory. (a) for some
reasons, a part of the mountain area is devoid of forests and topsoil. (b) Acids forming in topsoil
dissolve limestone a 100 times faster compared to limestone without forest cover. (c) When limestone
dissolves down to the ground water level, the forest withers and the first part of the polje forms. (d)
Dissolution of limestone in the remaining part with forest cover to the ground water level, when the
entire polje finally forms. The flooding period is presented (Vrkljan, 2019).
Od raQHPODGRVWLYROLRMHSULURGXDOL9HOHELWMHELRGUXJDþLMLRGQMHJRYLK$OSD. O ljepoti
krajolika piše profesoru Wittenbaueru: „Tako sam sjedio jedan sat i nisam se mogao do sita
nagledati krajolika. Sve najljepše i najstrašnije što priroda može ponuditi nalazilo se ispred
PHQHOLMHYRNODVLþQLRJURPQLREOLFL6HQMVNRJ%LODVYLVRNLPSODWRLPD6HQMVNHGXOLEHNUãNH
udoline), koji su se blago spuštali u seoce Mali Stolar, a ispred mene bio je strmi pad stijena
u dubinu gdje se otvarao pogled na svijet divljih klDQDFD'UDJDGROLQH.DRGXJDþNLUHGRYL
71
vojnika izbijali su slojeviti vrhovi iz strmih obronaka obraslih tamnim šumama. U dubini su
ponori presijecali doline na visokom platou, a u tamnim sjenama koje su se nalazile na
njihovim stranama vidjeli su se UD]ORPOMHQLREOLFLVWUPLKYDSQHQDþNLKVWLMHQD«SRJOHGVH
nadalje pružao prema luci Senj, te dalje na more, koje je sjajilo najljepšom plavom bojom
L]PHÿX GXJLK XVNLK RWRND NRML VX X GDOMLQL ELOL RPHÿHQL V 0RQWH 0DJJLRUH 8þND L
zamagljenim obrisima Istarskog poluotoka. Tako sam još uživao u predivnom zalasku sunca
i tek sam kasno krenuo dalje“ (Terzaghi, 1909a).
7HU]DJKLMHYD WHRULMD QLMH QDLãOD QD RGREUDYDQMH YRGHüLK JHRPRUIRORJD &YLMLüD *UXQGD L
GUXJLKNRMLVXVYRMHWXPDþHQMHWHPHOMLOLQDULMHþQRMHUoziji i abraziji. Terzaghijeva je teorija
GRELOD RSüH SUL]QDQMH QDNRQ ãWR MX MH :DOWKHU 3HQFN X Ä7HNWRQVNLP RVQRYDPD
]DSDGQH0DOH$]LMH³VQDåQRSRGUåDR2WWR/HKPDQMHWRXþLQLRXSLVPLPDNRMHMHUD]PLMHQLR
s Terzaghijem (Terzaghi, 1932). Kasnije su Kayser (1932) i 5RJOLü ukazivali na
opravdanost Terzaghijeva VKYDüDQMDLSULPLMHQLOLQMHJRYHLGHMHXVYRMLPUDGRYLPD5RJOLü
1951, 1957).
7HU]DJKLMHSUDWHüLPDÿDUVNRJJHRORJD9LNWRUD9RJODNRMLMHLVWUDåLYDRWHNWRQLNX%DNDUVNRJ
zaljeva, uvidio GDMHVORåHQDWHNWRQLND]DOMHYDSRVOMHGLFDQDYODþHQMDVWDULMLKSUHNRPODÿLK
slojeva i da se ne radi, kako je to pretpostavljao Vogl, o prevrnutoj bori (Terzaghi, 2011;
Vrkljan, 2019).
Na odlasku iz Hrvatske 30. srpnja 1910. Terzaghi je zapisao: „Zbogom moj Velebite, nikada
WH]DERUDYLWLQHüX“ (de Boer, 2010). 1DNRQDIHUHNRMDMHWUDJLþQR]DYUãLODVXLFLGRP3DXOD
Fillungera i njegove supruge Margarete Gregoritsch u ožujku 1937., Terzaghi sa suprugom
5XWKSRVMHüXMH+rvatsku radi odmora. U drugoj polovini svibnja 1937. borave u Zagrebu,
Splitu i nekim manjim mjestima na Jadranskoj obali (de Boer, 2010).
TERZAGHI I MEHANIKA STIJENA
7HU]DJKL MH ELR NRQ]XOWDQW QD PQRJLP SURMHNWLPD L] SRGUXþMD PHKDQLNH VWLMHQD 8] WR
objavljivao je u SR]QDWLP þDVRSLVLPD rezultate istraživanja vezanim uz temeljenje brana
(Terzaghi, 1962), stabilnosti kosina (Terzaghi, 1962a) a i o mjerenju naprezanja u stijenskoj
masi (Terzaghi, 1962b). Iako je i on zastupao mišljenje da se mehanika stijena treba razvijati
u sklopu mehanike tla, ipak je još 1936. godine priznao da se neki problemi stijenskog
inženjerstva ne mogu objasniti tehnikama koje je koristila mehanika tla. Terzaghi je u svom
SUHGVMHGQLþNRPREUDüDQMXQD3UYRMPHÿXQDURGQRMNRQIHUHQFLMLRPHKDQLFLWODLWHPHOMHQMX
1936. godine kazao: „Katastrofalno klizanje padina najdubljeg dijela Panamskog kanal
XND]XMHGDVXSUHNRUDþHQHJUDQLFHQDãHPRJXüQRVWLSUHGYLÿDQMDSRVOMHGLFDQDãLKDNFLMD.“
(Terzaghi, 1936). Naime, sva velika klizanja u Panamskom kanalu dogodila su se po
diskontinuitetima ãWR PHKDQLND WOD X RQR YULMHPH QLMH SUHSR]QDYDOD NDR NOMXþQL HOHPHQW
stabilnosti stijenskih masa.
0HÿXQDURGQR GUXãWYR ]D PHKDQLNX VWLMHQD L VWLMHQVNR LQåHQMHUVWYR ,650 - International

Society for Rock Mechanics and and rock Engineering) osnovano je u 25. svibnju 1962.
godine u Salzburgu. Formiranje ISRM-a bilo je bez sumnje pod jakim utjecajem Leopolda
72
Müllera i organizacije pod nazivom "Internationale Arbeitgemeinschaft für Geomechanik"

(International Study Group for Geomechanics). Ova je organizacija formirana 1951. godine
i QDMþHãüHVHVSRPLQMHNDRÄ6DO]EXUJHU.UHLV³6DO]EXUJ&LUFOH. (Lamas, 2012).
Treba naglasiti da su oko promoviranja mehanike stijena kao samostalne znanstvene i

inženjerske discipline mišljenja bila podijeljena. Prije svega, postajalo je mišljenje da se
mehanika stijena treba razvijati u okviru mehanike tla kao jedno njeno poglavlje. Ovaj stav
]DVWXSDOL VX þHOQLFL 0HÿXQDURGQRJ GUXãWYD ]D PHKDQLNX WOD L WHPHOMHQMH ,660)(-
International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering). U periodu 1961-1965
predsjednik ISSMFE-a bio je Arthur Casagrande a potpredsjednik Laurits Bjerrum.
0HÿXWLPSR]QDWRMHGDRQLQLVXGRQRVLOLYDåQHRGOXNHEH]VXJODVQRVWL.DUOD7HU]DJKLMDNRML
je bio predsjednik ISSMFE-a u periodu 1936-1957.
Müller bio je student Karla Terzaghija i zbog velikog poštovanja prema svom profesoru nije
želio osnovati ISRM dok ne dobije njegovu suglasnost. Müller je predložio da se društvo
zove „International Society for Geomechanics“ što Terzaghi, Bjerrum, Casagrande i
SkemptoQQLVXSULKYDWLOL0OOHUMHSRMDVQLR%MHUUXPXGDRQQHRVQLYDQRYRGUXãWYRYHüGD
samo mijenjaju ime društva koje je osnovano 1951. pod imenom. "Internationale
Arbeitgemeinschaft für Geomechanik". Zbog lakšeg prijevoda na engleski Müller predlaže
da se riMHþÄ$UEHLWJHPHLQVFKDIW³]DPLMHQLVULMHþLÄ*HVHOOVFKDIW³LWUDåLod Bjerruma mišljenje
o nazivu drštva kao: „International Society for Geomechanics and Rock Engineering“.
ýHOQLãWYR,660)(-a nije prihvatilo ovaj prijedlog. Tek kada je Müller predložioda se društvo
zove „International Society for Rock Mechanics“ Bjerrum obaviještava Müllera da je ovo
LPHRGREULR.DUO7HU]DJKLDWRMH]QDþLORGDVXJDSULKYDWLOLLRVWDOLþHOQLFL,660)(-a.
(a) (b)
Slika 7. (a) Bjerrum, Terzaghi i Casagrande, rujan, 1957. (b) Müller.

Fig. 7. (a) ISSMFE officers, Bjerrum, Terzaghi and Casagrande, Sept., 1957. (b) Müller.
7HU]DJKLMHUD]YLRHPSLULMVNLVXVWDYNODVLILNDFLMHVWLMHQDLWODL]ULþLWR]Dprojektiranje

LL]JUDGQMXWXQHODQDWHPHOMXSURXþDYDQMDQDþLQDVORPDVWLMHQDXWXQHOLPDWLMHNRPJUDÿHQMD
Radi se o polu kvalitativnom, ali sveobuhvatnom sustavu klasifikacije stijenske mase koju je
Terzaghi razvio u suradnji s tvrtkom Procter and White Steel. Ova klasifikacija uzima u obzir
73
XWMHFDMJHRORJLMHQDSURMHNWLUDQMHWXQHODVþHOLþQRPSRGJUDGRPDRSWHUHüHQMHVWLMHQDNRMH
QRVHþHOLþQLVHWRYLSURFLMHQMHQRMHQDWHPHOMXRSLVQHNODVLILNDFLMHNODVDVWLMHQD+RHN
Bio je to prvi sustav na engleskom jeziku koji je integrirao geologiju u proces projektiranja
WXQHOD 2YDM VXVWDY ELR MH WHPHOM ]D UD]YRM WUL QDMþHãüH NRULãHWQD NODVLILNDFLMVND VXVWDYD
stijenskih masa, Q (Barton), RMR (Bieniawski) i GSI (Hoek i Brown).
TERZAGHI I TUNELOGRADNJA
R.V. Proctor i Thomas White, objavili su 1946. knjigu pod naslovom „Rock Tunneling with
Steel Supports“ (Proctor at al, 1946). U ovoj je knjizi Terzaghi napisao prvo poglavlje koje
je iste godine objavio kao posebno izdanje pod naslovom: Rock defects and loads on tunnel
supports (Terzaghi, 1946). Terzaghi u predgovoru navodi da je ovom knjigom želio povezati
JUDÿHYLQVNH LQåHQMHUH L JHRORJH *ODYQL GLR NQMLJH DQDOL]LUD JHRORãNH XYMHWH NRML VX
odgovorni za pritiske na tunelsku podgradu.
Kako piše Hoek (2001), ELRMHWR]QDþDMDQGRSULQRVOLWHUDWXULRWXQHOLPDLGXJRJRGLQDMH

SUXåDRRVQRYX]DUDFLRQDOQRREOLNRYDQMHWXQHODSRVHEQRRQLKNRMLVXL]JUDÿHQLX6MHYHUQRM
$PHULFL +RHN SUHSRUXþXMH þLWDQMH RYH NQMLJH VYLPD NRML VX R]ELOMQR zainteresirani za
SUDNWLþQH DVSHNWH SURMHNWLUDQMD L JUDÿHQMD WXQHOD 7HU]DJKL MH VYRM NRQFHSW JUDGLR QD
SULPMHULPDWXQDODVþHOLþQRPSRdgradom koja treba preuzeti optereüHQMHVORPOMHQHVWLMHQVNH
mase što je uzrokovano iskopom tunela (slika 8b). Terzaghi je razvio skup smjernica za
SURFMHQXRSWHUHüHQMDVWLMHQD]DUD]OLþLWHJHRORãNHXYMHWH
Ä0HKDQLþND L NHPLVMVND RãWHüHQMD UDVSDGDQMH SRMHGLQLK PLQHUDOQLK VDVWRMDND JODYQL VX

uzroci pristiska na tunelsku podgradu. 3ULURGD RYLK RãWHüHQMD L QMLKRYH manifestacije u
WXQHOXYUORVXUD]OLþLWH]DUD]OLþLWHYUVWHVWLMHQD6WRJDMHHOHPHQWDUQRSR]QDYDQMHSULURGHL
XRELþDMHQLKRãWHüHQMDJODYQLKYUVWDVWLMHQDSUHGXYMHW]DDGHNYDWDQSURMHNWWXQHODDNRULVQR
je inženjeru koji radi u tunelu (Terzaghi, 1946).“ Terzaghi daje pregled osnovnih tipova
VWLMHQD L QMLKRYD VSHFLILþQD VYRMVWYD NDR L QDMþHãüD PHKDQLþND L NHPLMVND RãWHüHQMD RYLK
VWLMHQDNRMLLPDMXL]UDYDQXWMHFDMQDSURFHVJUDÿHQMDWXQHOD
7HU]DJKLMHSUYLXYHRRGUHÿLYDQMHRSWHUHüHQMDQDþHOLþQXSRGgradu na osnovi opisne

NODVLILNDFLMHVWLMHQVNHPDVH7HU]DJKLVNUHüHSR]RUQRVWQDRQHNDUDNWHULVWLNHNRMHGRPLQLUDMX
XSRQDãDQMXVWLMHQVNHPDVHSRVHEQRXVLWXDFLMDPDNDGDMHGRPLQDQWQRRSWHUHüHQMHWHåLQD
SRUHPHüHQHVWLMHQVNHPDVHL]QDGWXQHOVNHSRGJUDGHPomacima slomljene stijene (površina
a,c,d,b) na slici 8E RSLUH VH WUHQMH X]GXå ERþQLK JUDQLFD L RYH VLOH WUHQMD SRPDåX X
SUHQRãHQMXQDMYHüHJGLMHODWHåLQHSRNUHQXWHPDVHQDRNROQXVWLMHQXLQDERþQHVWUDQHWXQHOD
1D WDM QDþLQ VYRG L ERþQH VWUDQH SRGJUDGH SUHX]LPDMX QD VHEH VDPR EDODQV NRML MH
ekvivalentan parametru H p . Terzaghi je povezao ovaj parametar s dimenzijama tunela i
NDUDNWHULVWLNDPDVWLMHQDNDNRELGHILQLUDRQL]VPMHUQLFD]DþHOLþQHOXþQHSRGJUDGH
Terzaghi (1925) je objavio jedno od prvih elasto-SODVWLþQLKUMHãHQMD]DUDVSRGMHOXQDSUH]DQMD
oko ciOLQGULþQRJ SRG]HPQRJ RWYRUD DOL QLMH SULPLMHQLR VYRMH SURUDþXQH QD SURMHNWLUDQMH
WXQHOVNHSRGJUDGH,]PHÿXNDGDMHREMDYOMHQ)HQQHURYUDGLREMDYOMHQRMHYLãH
od 20 alternativnih rješenja za interakciju tunelske podgrade i stijenske mase (Hoek, 2001).
7HU]DJKLMHYDPHWRGDQHUD]PDWUDSRQDãDQMHþHODWXQHODWLMHNRPLVNRSD7DMQHGRVWDWDNQLMH
74
QDURþLWRYDåDQDNRVHUDGLLUHODWLYQRSOLWNLPPDOLPWXQHOLPDJGMHVHSRSRWUHELQHVWDELOQRVW
þHOD PRåH UHODWLYQR MHGQRVWDYQR ULMHãLWL 0HÿXWLP, V SRYHüDQMHP YHOLþLQH L GXELQH WXQHOD
SUREOHPVWDELOQRVWLþHODWXQHODSRVWDMHMDNRR]ELOMDQ
(a)
(b)
Hp
Slika 8. D7HU]DJKLMHYDVNLFDRSWHUHüHQMDQDWXQHOVNXSRGJUDGXE7HU]DJKLMHYFRQFHSWOXþQRJ

HIHNWDQDVWLMHQXSRUHPHüHQXiskopom (Terzaghi 1946).
Fig. 8. (a) Terzaghi’s record of loads on tunnel support. (b) Terzaghi's (1946) ground arch concept of
movement of loosened rock toward a tunnel.
Terzaghijev angažman u podzemnoj željeznici u Chicagu, 1939.-1941., utjecao je na njegovu

odluku o stalnom prebivalištu u Sjedinjenim $PHULþNLPDržavama i snažno utjecao na razvoj
primijenjene mehanike tla (Peck, 1975). Radio je kao konzultant za “Department of Subways
and Traction of the city of Chicago“. U to vrijeme mladi inženjer Ralph Peck bio je zadužen
]DJHRWHKQLþNHDVSHNWHJUDÿHQMDWXQHODXPHNDQRMSODVWLþQRMJOLQL i radio je pod nadzorom i
YRGVWYRP .DUOD 7HU]DJKLMD *ODYQD MH SDåQMD SRVYHüHQD QDþLQX JUDÿHQMD WXQHOD kako bi
VOLMHJDQMH SRYUãLQH ELOR þLP Panje (Cording, 2013; Terzaghi, 1942). Kako kaže Rogers
(2000), Peck je 1939. napustio Harvard kako bi SRVOXåLRNDRÄRþLLXãL³.DUOD7HU]DJKLMDQD
WRP]QDþDMQRPSURMHNWX7HU]DJKLMHMHGDQWMHGDQPMHVHþQRSURYRGLRX&KLFDJXDQDOL]LUDMXüL
mjerenja koje je oEDYOMDR3HFN3HFNMHPRUDRVYDNLGDQSLVDWLL]YMHãWDMHRGRJDÿDQMLPDX
tunelima. Kako je znao da Terzaghiju ne smije poslati površan izvještaj, po nekoliko se puta
YUDüDRXWXQHONDNRELga provjerio i dopunio. Uz to, Peck je morao voditi dnevnik ne samo
vlastitim aktivnostima, veüi o svim razgovorima koje je vodio s Terzaghijem.
75
(a)
(b)
Slika 9. (a) 5XþQLfazni iskop tunela na stanici Chicago Avenue, 29.05.1939. (Dunnicliff and Deere,
1991, ); (b) Skica faznog iskopa tunela prema ugovoru S 5 (Cording, 2013).
Figure 9. (a) Hand sequential excavation of Chicago Avenue Station; (b) Sequential heading and
bench excavation, Contract S 5 (Cording, 2013).
U pregovorima oko angažmana na ovom projektu, Terzaghi je zahtijevao uspostavljanje

laboratorija za ispitivanje tla opremljenog za sva ispitivanja koja on odredi7DNRÿHUMHWUDåLR
GDRVREQRRGDEHUHYRGLWHOMDODERUDWRULMDNRMLüHELWLSRGQMHJRYLPQDG]RURPDOLQDgradskoj
platnoj listi. Takoÿer je tražio tada neviÿenu naknadu od 100 dolara dnevno. Naknada, koja
je zahtijevala posebno odobrenje Gradskog vijeüa i koja je uslijed toga mnogo oglašavana u
novinama, odmah je skrenula pažnju lokalnog stanovništva na njega i na mehaniku tla (Peck,
1975).
Terzaghi nije imao ranija iskustva u graÿenju tunela u mekanoj glini. Veüina njegovih ranijih
angažmana odnosila se na temelje i brane. MeÿutimWRQLMHRVMHüDRNDRSUREOHPQLWLVHEH
RVREQRQLWLPRJXüQRVWLNRMHMHPHKDQLNHWODPRJODSUXåLWLNjegova su oþekivanja bila više
nego opravdana, jer su mu sljedeüe tri godine bile razdoblje uzbudljivog razvoja, kako njega
samoga tako i mehanike tla. Važnost projekta i velika koliþina vremena koje mu je posvetio
u tom razdoblju bili su nesumnjivi presudni u odluci da postane državljanin Sjedinjenih
$PHULþNLK 'UåDYD i da provede ostatak svoje konzultantske i profesorske karijere u ovoj
državi (Peck, 1975).
Projekt podzemne željeznice Chicago zaustavljen je u svibnju 1942. godine zbog nestašice
þHOLNDNRMLMHELRX]URNRYDQXODVNRP$PHULNDX'UXJLVYMHWVNLUDWXSURVLQFXJRGLQH
76
5RJHUV8VYLEQMX3HFNXMHSRQXÿHQRPMHVWRX,OOLQRLVXGDSUHGaje mehanika

tla. Kad je Peck pitao Terzaghija za njegov savjet, ovaj je oštro odgovorio da Pecku treba
YLãHLVNXVWYDSULMHQHJRãWRELPRJDRELWLXþLWHOMWHPHOMHQMD7DNRMH3HFNMHRGELRSRQXGX
VYHXþLOLãWDãWRJRYRULRQMHJRYRPGXERNRPSRãWRYDQMXSUHPD Terzaghiju (Rogers, 2000).
3LRQLUVNLUDG.DUOD7HU]DJKLMDL5DOSKD3HFNDLþLNDãNLODERUDWRULM]DPHKDQLNXWODSRVWDYLOL
VXVWDQGDUG]DLVWUDåLYDQMHLNRQWUROXSRPDNDWODWLMHNRPJUDÿHQMDWXQHODL]DJHRWHKQLþND
LVWUDåLYDQMDRSüHQLWR (Cording, 2013).
Izraz "metoda opažanja" (observational method) XYHR MH X JHRWHKQLþNR inženjerstvo Peck
(1969.) u svom Rankineovom predavanju. Pri tome je slijedio Terzaghija koji je u vrijeme
LVNRSD þLNDãNLK WXQHOD SUHGORåLR PHWRGX koju je alternativno nazvao "eksperimentalnom
PHWRGRPLPHWRGRPXþHQMDkako napreduješ" (learn-as-you-go method) (Kovári i Lunardi,
2000; Peck, 1969).
7LMHNRP JUDÿHQMD þLNDãNLK WXQHOD 7HU]DJKL L 3HFN VX ]DSRþHOL SUHUDGX 7HU]DJKLMHYH
Ä7HRULMVNXPHKDQLNXWOD³L]3UHUDÿHQXYHU]LMXVXREMDYLOLSRGQDVORYRP"Soil
Mechanics in Engineering Practice" (Terzaghi and Peck, 1948). Drugo izdanje ovo knjige
SULUHGLR MH 3HFN QDNRQ 7HU]DJKLMHYH VPUWL D WUHüH L]GDQMH VX SULUHGLOL 3HFN L
Gholamreza Mesri, 1996.
LITERATURA:
Akagi, T. 2000. I can hear it now - Terzaghi and Peck, GEOTECH-YEAR 2000, Developments in
Geotechnical Engineering, 27-30 November 2000, Bangkok, Thailand, pp.400-405.
Bjerum, L., Øiseth U. 1971. The Terzaghi Library. Terzaghi Library Memories. Norwegian
Geotechnical Institute.
Brandl, H. 1983. 100 Years Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. mult. Karl v. Terzaghi. Mitteilungen für Grundbau,
Bodenmechanik und Felsbau, Technische Universität Wien (ed. Brandl), Vol. 2 (in German
and English), pp. 11-41.
Brandl, H. 1983a. History of the Institute for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering at the Vienna
Tech. Univ. Mitteilungen für Grundbau, Bodenmechanik und Felsbau, Technische
Universität Wien (ed. Brandl), Vol. 2 (in German and English), pp. 43-70.
Brandl, H. 1995. Karl Terzaghi-Life and Work, Drugo savjetovanje Hrvatskog društva za mehaniku tla
i temeljenje. Varaždin, 04-06. 10. 1995., Vol.1.: 11-31.
Casagrande, A. 1960. Karl Terzagh i - His Life and Achievements. In: From Theory to Practice in Soil
Mechanics. Selections from Writings of Karl Terzaghi, Willey, New York, pp 3-21.
Casagrande, A. 1964. Karl Terzaghi, 1883-1963, Geotechnique, 1964, No. 14: 1-9.
Cording, E. J. 2013. Tunneling in Chicago Clay: Pioneering Work in Ground Control. International
Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 4.
&YLMLü - 1893. Das Karstphänomen. Versuch einer morpholagische Monographic. Geographische.
Abhandlungen. Herausg. A. Penck. Band V, Heft 3: 218-329.
Davis, W. M. 1884. Geographic classification by a study of plains, plateaux and their derivatives. Proc.
Am. Assoc., 33: 428-432.
de Boer, R. 2010. The Engineer and the Scandal, Springer, 293 p.
Dunnicliff, J., Deere, D.U. (Eds), 1991. Judgment in Geotechnical Engineering. The Professional
Legacy of Ralph B. Peck. BiTech Publischer LTD. Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
77
Dunnicliff, J., Peck Young, N. (Eds), 2006, Raph B. Peck, Educator and Engineer, The Esence oft he
man- BiTech Publischer LTD. Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Einstein, H.H. 1991. Observation, quantification, and judgment: Terzaghi and engineering
geology. Geotechnical Engineering, 117 (11): 1772-1778.
Glosop, R. 1964. A personal Tribute to Karl Terzaghi, Geotechnique, 1964, No. 14: 9-12.
Goodman, R. E. 1999. Karl Terzaghi-Engineer as Artist, ASCE Press 340 p.
Goodman, R. 2003. Karl Terzaghi and engineering geology, Geotechnical engineering: meeting
society's needs. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conference,
Hong Kong, 10-14 December 2001. Vol. 3, Ho&Li (Eds).
Goodman, R.E., (2002). Karl Terzaghi's legacy in Geotechnical Engineering, Geo-Strata —Geo
Institute of ASCE, 2002, Vol. 3, Issue 4: 18-21.
Grund, A., 1903. Die Karsthydrographie. Studien aus Westbosnien. Geographische. Abhandlungen.
Herausg. A. Penck Band VII, Heft 3: 1-200.
Hoek, E. 2001. Big tunnels in bad rock, 2000 Terzaghi lecture, ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering. Vol. 127, No. 9. September 2001, pp. 726-740.
Hoek, E. 2007. Practical Rock Engineering (https://www.rocscience.com/learning/hoeks-
corner/course-notes-books) In Rockslides and Avalanches (ed. B. Voight), Part 2: 111-131.
Kaiser, P. 2019. From common to best practices in underground rock engineering, 8th Müller lecture
presented at the 14th ISRM Congress, Foz de Iguaçu, Brazil, CRC Press, pp. 141-182.
Kayser, K. 1932. Morphologische Studien in Westmontenegro, Zeitsch. d. Gesell. f. Erdkunde, Berlin,
pp. 248-279.
Kovári, K., Lunardi, P. 2000. On the observational method in tunnelling, International conference on
geotechnical and geological engineering, GeoEng 2000: 692-707.
Lamas, L., 2012. The ISRM Founding documents, ISRM 50 th Anniversary Commemorative Book,
(Hudson and Lamas editors), pp.11-30.
Peck, R., B. (1969) Advantages and Limitations of the Observational Method in Applied Soil
Mechanics, Géotechnique, Volume 19 Issue: 171-188.
Peck, R., B. 1975. Karl Terzaghi and the Chicago Subway, Journal of Professional Activities, Vol. 101,
Issue 4: 477-484. Reprinted in: Dunnicliff, J., Deere, D.U. (Eds), 1991. Judgment in
Geotechnical Engineering. The Professional Legacy of Ralph B. Peck. BiTech Publischer
LTD. Vancouver, B.C., Canada. pp. 56-61.
Penck, W. 1918. Die tektonische Grundüge Westkleinasiens, Beitr. z. Anatolischen Gebirgsgeschichte
auf Grund eigener Reisen. Engelhorns Nachf., Stuttgart, 120 p.
Proctor, R.V., White, T. 1946. Rock Tunneling with Steel Supports. Commercial Shearing and
Stamping Company, Youngstown, Ohio.
Redlich, K.A.,Terzaghi, K., Kampe, R. 1929. Ingenieurgeologie, Springer, Vienna, 708 p.
Rogers, J. D. 2013. Ralph Peck’s Circuitous Path to Professor of Foundation Engineering (1930-48).
International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 6.
5RJOLü- 1951. Unsko-.RUDQVND]DUDYDQL3OLWYLþNDMH]HUDJHRPRUIRORãNDSURPDWUDQMDGeografski
glasnik, br. 13: 49-66.
5RJOLü - 1939. Morphologie der Poljen von Kupres und Vukovsko, Zeitsch. der Gesellsch. f.
Erdkunde. Heft 7-8, Berlin 1939.
5RJOLü- 1957. Zaravni u vapnencima. Geografski glasnik, 1957, br. 19: 103-134.
Terzaghi, K. 1909. Diary.
Terzaghi, K. 1911. Bemerkung zur Tektonik der Umgebung von Buccari. Geologische Mitteilungen
des Ungarische geologische Gesellschaftliches, Zeitsschrift vol 41: 684-695, Budapest.
Terzaghi, K. 1913. Beitrag zur Hydrographie und Morphologie des kroatischen Karstes. Jahrbuch Kgl.
Ungar. Geol. Reichsanstalt, XX. Band, 6. Heft: 255-369, Budapest, Franklin-Verain.
Terzaghi, K. 1925. Erdbaumechanik auf Bodenphysikalischer Grundlage. Franz Deuticke, Vienna,
Austria, pp. 212-214.
78
Terzaghi, K. 1932 Mein Lebensweg und meineZiele. Autobiographie anläßlich der Aufnahme in die
Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien.
Terzaghi, K. 1936. Presidential Address. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. for Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Engineering, Cambridge, Mass. 1 , 22-3.
Terzaghi, K. 1942. Liner Plate Tunnels on the Chicago (ILL.) Subway”, Proc. ASCE, vol. 68, No. 6:
862-898.
Terzaghi, K. 1946. Rock Defects and Loads on Tunnel Supports. In: Proctor, R.V. and White, T.L.,
Eds., Rock Tunneling with Steel Supports, Commercial Shearing and Stamping Company,
Youngstown.
Terzaghi, K, Peck, R.B. 1948. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. John Wiley and Sons.
Terzaghi, K. 1950. Memorandum concerning the stability of the slopes for the proposed Perus Quarry
near Sao Paulo, October 20, 1950.
Terzaghi, K. 1957. Presidential Address. Proc. of the Fourth International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, London, Vol. 3: 55-58.
Terzaghi, K. 1957a, Karl Terzaghi's last lecture on Engineering Geology at Harvard University,
www.Geoengineer.org
Terzaghi, K. 1957. Opening addres to the 4th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.
Pro c. 4th lnt. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Vol. Ill: 55- 58.
Terzaghi K. 1958. Landforms and subsurface drainage in the Gacka region in Yugoslavia, Annals of
Geomorphology, Vol. 2, No. ½: 76-100.
Terzaghi, K. 1961. Engineering Geology on the Job and in the Classroom, Journ. Boston Soc. Civ.
Engr., April. pp. 97-109.
Terzaghi, K. 1962. Dam foundation on sheeted granite, Geotechnique, Vol 12, No 3, pp. 199-208.
Terzaghi, K. 1962a. Stability of steep slopes on hard unweathered rock Geotechnique, Vol 12, No 4:
251-270.
Terzaghi, K. 1962b. Measurement of stresses in rock, Geotechnique, Vol 12, No 2: 105-124.
Vrkljan, I. 2019. Karl Terzaghi and Croatia karst, ,650 6SHFLDOLVHG &RQIHUHQFH 0HÿXQDURGQD
NRQIHUHQFLMD 6DYMHWRYDQMH +UYDWVNRJ JHRWHKQLþNRJ GUXãWYD *HRWHFKQLFDO FKDOOHQJHV LQ
karst. Omiš – Split, Croatia, pp. 29-52 (hrv), 53-78 (eng).
79
UDK 624.154.04
8325('1$$1$/,=$3525$ý81$
126,9267,â,329$35(0$(1,'20$û(0
PRAVILNIKU
Nikola Obradoviü9HOMNR3XMHYLü, 0LUMDQD9XNLüHYLü
*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWDX%HRJUDGX%XO.UDOMD Aleksandra 73,
Beograd, pujevic.veljko@gmail.com
REZIME
Standard SRPS EN 1997-1 je krajem 2018. godine preveden i usvojen, dok je izrada
QDFLRQDOQLK SULORJD X ]DYUãQRM ID]L 6 WLP X YH]L NDR L ]ERJ EURMQLK QHGRXPLFD VWUXþQH
javnosti u vezi sa primenom EN 1997-1, autori su u ovom radu dali pojašnjenja procesa
projektovanja aksijalno pritisnutih šipova prema EN75D]OLNHL]PHÿXGRPDüHJSUDYLOQLNDL
(1LOXVWURYDQHVXNUR]QXPHULþNLSULPHUþLMLMHSULPDUQLFLOMXSRUHGQDDQDOL]DGXåLQDãLSRYD
prema tradicionalnom postupku(globalni faktor sigurnosti) i prema EN7 (parcijalni faktori).
Sprovedene analize potvrdile su podobnost SUHSRUXþHQHYUHGQRVWLPRGHOVNRJIDNWRUDȖ M date
u nacrtu nacionalnog priloga.
./-8ý1(5(ý,Evrokod 7, nosivost šipova, modelski faktor
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PILE DESIGN

USING EUROCODE 7 AND NATIONAL CODE OF
PRACTICE
ABSTRACT
The standard SRPS EN 1997-1 was translated and adopted at the end of 2018, while the
development of national annexes is in the final stage. In this regard, and due to concerns of
engineering community about the application of EN 1997-1, the authors of this paper have
provided clarification of the design process of axially loaded compression piles according
EN7. The differences between the national code of practice and EN7 are illustrated through
a design example, which aimed to compare pile lengths obtained applying the traditional
procedure (global security factor) and to EN7 (partial factors). The performed analyses
FRQILUPHGWKHVXLWDELOLW\RIWKHUHFRPPHQGHGYDOXHRIWKHPRGHOIDFWRUȖ M provided in the
draft national annex.
KEY WORDS: Eurocode 7, pile bearing capacity, model factor

80
UVOD
(YURNRG (1 ]DVQLYD VH QD NRQFHSWX JUDQLþQLK VWDQMD L NDUDNWHULVWLþQLK YUHGQRVWL
Uvodjenje koncepta JUDQLþQLKVWDQMDXJHRWHKQLþNXVWUXNX predstavlja suštinsku promenu u
filozofiji projektovanja X RGQRVX QD WUDGLFLRQDOQL QDþLQ SURMHNWRYDQMD SUHPD GRSXãWHQLP
naponima i jedinstvenom globalnom faktoru sigurnosti. 1D WDM QDþLQ REH]EHÿHQD MH
metodološka harmonizacija L]PHÿXkonstrukterskog i geoWHKQLþNRJSURMHNWRYDQMD
Proces projektovanja VH ]DVQLYD QD NRQFHSWX GRND]D JUDQLþQLK VWDQMD QRVLYRVWL,
upotrebljivosti i trajnosti, primenom metode parcijalnih koeficijenata sigurnosti odnosno
SURUDþXQVNLK YUHGQRVWL ]D VYH SURUDþXQVNH VLWXDFLMH. To VXãWLQVNL ]QDþL GD MH SURUDþXQRP
potrebno za VYDUHOHYDQWQDJUDQLþQDVWDQMDdokazati da QLVXSUHNRUDþHQD. Ovakav savremeni
koncept projektovanja primorava inženjere da zapravo razmišljaju prvenstveno u kontekstu
PRJXüLK REOLND mehanizama loma (Bond i sar., 2008). Metod parcijalnih koeficijenata
sigurnosti predstavlja polu-SUREDELOLVWLþNLSULVWXSXNRPHVHNRULVWHNDUDNWHULVWLþQHYUHGQRVWL
VOXþDMQRSURPHQOMLYLK, a parcijalnim faktorima sigurnosti se uzimaju u obzir nepouzdanosti
vezane za uticaje od dejstava, materijalnih svojstava i otpora.
Parcijalni faktori sigurnosti kalibrisani su tako da se dobiju zahtevani nivoi pouzdanosti, koji
VHXRELþDMHQRL]UDåDYDMXXIRUPLSULKYDWOMLYHYHURYDWQRüHORPHS f,max ili putem minimalne
vrednosti indeksa SRX]GDQRVWL ȕ min . 2YDNDY SULVWXS NDOLEUDFLML þHVWR XPH GD UH]XOWLUD
GUDVWLþQRUD]OLþLWLPNRQDþQLPrešenjima u odnosu na konvencionalne postupke projektovanja
prema dopuštenim naponima. 'D EL VH ERJDWR LVNXVWYR VWHþHQR X SUDNWLþQRM SULPHQL
tradicionalnog pristupa prema dopuštenim naponima inkorporiralo u novu metodologiju,
RPRJXüHQMHizbora alternativnih vrednosti koeficijenta kroz nacionalne priloge. U tu svrhu,
u kontekstu YHULILNDFLMHJUDQLþQRJVWDQMDQRVLYRVWLDNVLMDOQRSULWLVQXWLKãLSRYDDQDOLWLþNLP
meWRGDPD0HKDQLNHWODQDURþLWRSRJRGDQPRåHGDEXGHPRGHOVNLIDNWRU
U okviru ovog rada sprovedena je uporedna analiza nosivosti šipova prema Evrokodu i
GRPDüHP 3UDYLOQLNX VD FLOMHP RFHQH SRGREQRVWL UD]OLþLWLK SURUDþXQVNLK SULVWXSD .DR
osnovni kriterijum ]DHYDOXDFLMXSRGREQRVWLXVYRMHQDMHVOLþQRVWNRQDþQRJUHãHQMDRGQRVQR
X NRQNUHWQRP VOXþDMX GXåLQD ãLSD 3URUDþXQVNL SULPHU NRULãüHQ X RYRP UDGX SUHGVWDYOMD
modifikaciju primera koji su prvobitno formulisali (Orr i sar., 2005), a koji je kasnije koriãüHQ
u osnovnom ili modifikovanom obliku u brojnim publikacijama (Frank, 2006, Wang i sar..
2011). 7DNRÿH LVSLWDQD MH LVSUDYQRVW SUHSRUXþHQH YUHGQRVWL PRGHOVNRJ faktora Ȗ M date u
QDFLRQDOQRPSULORJX1DLPHQDFUWRPQDFLRQDOQRJSULORJDSUHGYLÿHQR je da se za verifikaciju
JUDQLþQRJVWDQMDQRVLYRVWLDNVLMDOQRSULWLVQXWLKãLSRYDNRULVWLSURUDþXQVNLSULVWXS33X]
vrednost modelskog faktora u iznosu Ȗ M = 1.5.
3525$ý81$.6,-$/1235,7,6187,+â,329$35(0$(952.2'8
Evrokod 7 nudi projektantima tri proUDþXQVNDSULVWXSDNRMLVHPHÿXVREQRUD]OLNXMXXPHVWX

primene parcijalnih faktora sigurnosti. 3RVWRMDQMHWULSURUDþXQVNDSULVWXSDproisteklo je u toku
razvoja Evrokoda 7, kao posledica nepostojanja konsenzusa po pitanju jedinstvene
metodologije. U RNYLUXSURUDþXQVNRJSULVWXSD33SRX]GDQRVWMHREH]EHÿHQDXYRÿHQMHP
parcijalnih faktora za dve osnovne promenljive, DOLXGYD]DVHEQDSURUDþXQD(izuzetak šipovi)
(Kombinacije 1&2), dok je u PP2 i PP3 pouzdanost REH]EHÿHQD IDNWRULVDQMHP GYH
promenljive istovremeno. U PP1 neophodno je proveriti obe kombinacije.
81
8VORYQD MHGQDþLQD ]D YHULILNDFLMX JUDQLþQRJ VWDQMD QRVLYRVWL (ULS) aksijalno pritisnutih
šipova LPDVOHGHüLREOLN
E cd 5 cd
gde E cd SUHGVWDYOMDSURUDþXQVNXYUHGQRVWXWLFDMDD5 cd SURUDþXQVNXYUednost nosivosti.

3URFHV YHULILNDFLMH JUDQLþQLK VWDQMD QRVLYRVWL LOXVWUDWLYQR MH SULND]DQ GLMDJUDPRP WRND
preuzetog iz (Bond i sar., 2008).
Slika 1. Algoritam za dokaz JUDQLþQLKVWDQMDQRVLYRVWLãLSRYD

Figure 1. Overview of verification of strength
Spoljašnja dejstva (F), geometrijske karakteristike (a) i materijalna svojstva (X), þLQH
RVQRYQHVOXþDMQHSURPHQOMLYHNRMHILJXULãXNDRXOD]QLSRGDFL]DXWYUÿLYDQMH SURUDþXQVNLK
vrednosti uticaja i nosivosti.
3URUDþXQVNDYUHGQRVWaksijalne sile pritiska F cd data je kao:
F cd = Ȗ G G rep Ȗ Q Q rep
JGHVXȖ G,Q parcijalni faktori za dejstva, dok su G rep i Q rep reprezentativne vrednosti aksijalne
sile od stalnih i promenljivih dejstava. Reprezentativne vrednosti dejstava dobijaju se
faktoULVDQMHPNDUDNWHULVWLþQLKYUHGQRVWLGHMVWDYDNRHILFLMHQWLPD]DNRPELQRYDQMH
âWR VH WLþH NRQNUHWQR QRVLYRVWL, (YURNRG RPRJXüDYD SURMHNWDQWX GD SRUHG primene
NODVLþQLK DQDOLWLþNLK SURUDþXQVNLK PRGHOD NRULVWL L RSLWH VWDWLþNRJ L GLQDPLþNRJ SUREQRJ
RSWHUHüHQMD7UHEDQDJODVLWLGD(YURNRGQDURþLWRSRWHQFLUDSULPHQXWHVWDVWDWLþNRJSUREQRJ
RSWHUHüHQMD, bilo kao primarne metode za ocenu nosivosti, bilo kao validacione metode.
82
Generalno, sa stanovišta procene nosivosti, Evrokod 7 prednost daje postupcima koji se

]DVQLYDMXQDUH]XOWDWLPDWHUHQVNLKRSLWDL]PHÿXRVWDORJLSHQHWUDFLRQLKPHWRGD (CPT i SPT).
$QDOLWLþNL SURUDþXQVNL SRVWXSFL PHKDQLNH WOD VH X RNYLUX (YURNRda 7 tretiraju kao
alternativne metode, što brojni autori (Bond i sar., 2008, Frank, 2006) vide NDRQHORJLþQRVW
X]LPDMXüL X RE]LU GD VX RYH PHWRGH X YHüLQL þODQLFD (8 L GDOMH SULPDUQL YLG SURUDþXQD
nosivosti šipova.
3URUDþXQVNDQRVLYRVWDNVLMDOQRSULWLVQXWRJãLSDGDWDMHNDR
R cd = R bd + R sd = R bk /(Ȗ b Ȗ M ) + R sk /(Ȗ s Ȗ M )
gde su R bd , R sd SURUDþXQVNHQRVLYRVWLEDVHLRPRWDþDãLSD5 bk , R sk NDUDNWHULVWLþQHQRVLYRVWL

ED]H L RPRWDþD, dok su Ȗ b,s SDUFLMDOQL IDNWRUL ]D QRVLYRVWL RGQRVQR Ȗ M modelski
faktor(opciono).
.DUDNWHULVWLþQDQRVLYRVWDNVLMDOQRSULWLVQXWLKãLSRYDSULPHQRPPHWRGDNRMHVHzasnivaju na
UH]XOWDWLPDWHUHQVNLKRSLWDNRQNUHWQRSHQHWUDFLRQLKRSLWDGRELMDVHL]VOHGHüHJREUDVFD
R k = min(R mean ȟ mean , R min ȟ min )
gde R mean,min SUHGVWDYOMDMXSURVHþQXRGQRVQRPLQLPDOQXYUHGQRVWQRVLYRVWED]HLOLRPRWDþD

šipa, dobijenu iz odgovaraMXüLKHPSLULMVNLKNRUHODFLMDsa setom rezultata penetracionih opita
(npr. CPT profili) ȟ mean,min predstavljaju korelacione faktore koji su funkcija broja
penetracionih rezultata.
Modelski faktor Ȗ M XYRGL VH LVNOMXþLYR NRG RGUHÿLYDQMD SURUDþXQVNH YUHGQRVWL QRVLYRVW
DNVLMDOQR SULWLVQXWLK ãLSRYD SULPHQRP DQDOLWLþNLK metoda mehanike tla i nije precizno
GHILQLVDQ RGUHGEDPD (YURNRGD YHü MH RVWDYOMHQR ]HPOMDPD SULPHQLRFLPD (1 GD QD
nivou nacionalnih priloga samostalno usvoje njegovu vrednost. ,GHMD ]D XYRÿHQMHP
PRGHOVNRJIDNWRUDSURLVWHNODMHL]þLQMHQLFHGDVXSDUFLMDOQLIDNWRUL]DRWSRUH šipa u PP1 i
PP2 (1.0-1.6 za bazu, 1.0-]DRPRWDþ ]QDþDMQRQLåLXSRUHÿHQMXVDJOREDOQLPIDNWRULPD
NRULãüHQLPXWUDGLFLRQDOQRPSULVWXSX-3.0). Kao što je prethodno pomenuto, Evrokod 7
prednost daje postupcima koji se zasnivaju na rezultatima terenskih opita kod kojih figurišu
LGRSXQVNLNRUHODFLRQLIDNWRULþLPHVH]DSUDYRSUDYGDMXXVYRMHQHQLåHYUHGQRVWL parcijalnih
faktora za otpore.
Vrednosti parcijalnih faktora za dejstva, materijalna svojstva i otpore, kao i korelacionih
faktora date su u tabelama 1 i 2.
Tabela 1. Vrednosti parcijalnih faktoUD]DSURUDþXQVNHSULVWXSH]DSURMHNWRYDQMHãLSRYD
Table 1. Values of partial factors for design approaches for piles
Ugao Efektivna Nedrenirana Nosivost Nosivost Nosivost Nosivost
Stalna Promenljiv
3URUDþXQVNL dejstva a dejstva unutrašnjeg kohezija þYUVWRüD baze bušeni baze pobijeni RPRWDþD RPRWDþD
pristup WUHQMDȖࢥ¶ Ȗc’ Ȗcu šip šip bušeni šip pobijeni šip
ȖG ȖG
Ȗb Ȗb Ȗs Ȗb
PP1, K1 1.35 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.15 1.00
PP1, K2 1.00 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.30 1.50 1.30
PP2 1.35 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10
PP3 1.35(1.0) 1.5(1.3) 1.25 1.25 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
83
Tabela 2. Vrednosti korelacionih faktora za penetracione opite

Table 2. Values of correlation factors for penetration tests
n 1 2 3 4 5 7 10
ȟmean,3 1.40 1.35 1.33 1.31 1.29 1.27 1.25
ȟmin,4 1.40 1.27 1.23 1.20 1.15 1.12 1.08
OPIS METODA ZA PROCENU NOSIVOSTI ŠIPA
1RVLYRVWãLSDRGUHÿXMHVHSUHPDL]UD]X
Q = Q b + Q s = q b ÂA b + q s ÂA s
gde je Q b nosivost baze, Q s QRVLYRVWRPRWDþD$ b površina baze šipa, A s SRYUãLQDRPRWDþD

šipa, q b nosivost tla u nivou baze šipa, q s WUHQMHL]PHÿXRPRWDþDãLSDLRNROQRJWOD
Tabela 3. 0HWRGH]DRGUHÿLYDQMHQRVLYRVWLãLSD
Table 3. Methods for determination of pile bearing capacity
Metoda Baza 2PRWDþ
Metoda Meyerhof-a q b FCÂ1* c + K s ÂıC v ÂN* q q s = c’ + K s Âı’ v,sr Âtan ݊’
(Meyerhof, 1976) K s = 1 –sin ݊` K s = 1 –sin ݊`
drenirani uslovi ıC v vertikalni efektivni napon ı’ v,sr – SURVHþQDYUHGQRVW
u nivou baze šipa efektivnog vertikalnog napona
N* q , N* c faktori nosivosti GXåRPRWDþD
API metoda (API, 1984) q b = C u ÂN c ı v TV ĮÂ& u

nedrenirani uslovi N c = 9.0 Į ]D& u N3D
ı v – totalni vertikalni napon u Į ]D& u kPa
nivou baze šipa LQWHUSRODFLMD]DPHÿXYUHGQRVWL
LPC-CPT (Briaud, 2013) q b = k c Âq c 03D q s ĮÂI soil I lim
na osnovu rezultata CPT opita k c –faktor nosivosti Į ]DNUXSQR]UQRWOR
k c = 0.2 za bušene f soil – parametar trenja, zavisi
k c = 0.4 za pobijene od q c i vrste tla
f lim = 90 kPa za bušene
f lim = 130 kPa za pobijene
5$ý816.,35,0(5,
,]YUãHQMHSURUDþXQSRWUHEQHGXåLQHEXãHQRJLOLSRELMHQRJãLSDSUHþQLNDPPRSWHUHüHQRJ
QDYUKXVLODPDRGVWDOQRJLSURPHQOMLYRJRSWHUHüHQMD* rep = 900 kN i Q rep N1]DþHWLUL
VOXþDMD RSLV X WDEHOL 4 SUHPD GR]YROMHQRM VLOL GRPDüL SUDYLOQLN L SUHPD RGUHGEDPD
(YURNRGD]DUD]OLþLWHSURUDþXQVNHSULVWXSH5DþXQVNLSULPHULVXRVPLãOMHQLSRXJOHGXQD
VOLþQH primere iz literature(Orr, 2005). U oNYLUX SURUDþXQD SUHPD GRPDüHP SUDYLOQLNX
varirane su vrednosti faktora sigurnosti za ugao unutrašnjeg trenja i koheziju (primeri 1. i 2.),
IDNWRULVLJXUQRVWL]DXNXSQXQRVLYRVWRGQRVQRQRVLYRVWED]HLRPRWDþDSULPHULL8
RNYLUX SURUDþXQD SUHPD (YUokodu 7 varirane su vrednosti modelskog faktora za svaki
SURUDþXQVNLSULVWXSXLQWHUYDOXGR=DGRELMHQHSRWUHEQHGXåLQHãLSRYDVUDþXQDWDMH
JUDQLþQD QRVLYRVW ãLSD L XSRUHÿHQD ]D XNXSQRP QHIDNWRULVDQRP VLORP QD YUKX ãLSD
84
F rep =G rep +Q rep kako bi se dobio globalni IDNWRU VLJXUQRVWL ]D VYDNL SRVWXSDN SURUDþXQD
Globalni IDNWRUVLJXUQRVWLUDþXQDWXGDOMHPWHNVWXF u ) je kao:
F u = Q ult /F rep
gde je Q ult graniþQDQRVLYRVWãLSDU primeru 5. ]DSURUDþXQVNLSULVWXS33izvršena je

analiza uticaja vrednosti XJODXQXWUDãQMHJWUHQMDQDSRWUHEQXGXåLQXãLSD]DUD]OLþLWHYUHGQRVWL
PRGHOVNRJIDNWRUD8SULPHUXQLMHX]HWDXRE]LUNRKH]LMD3UHJOHGPHWRGDNRULãüHQLK]D
SURUDþXQQRVLYRVWLãLSRYDGDWMHXWDEHOL4.
Tabela 4. 5DþXQVNLSULPHUL
Table 4. Numerical examples
Primer Opis 0HWRGDSURUDþXQDQRVLYRVWLãLSD
1. Podaci o tlu: ݊¶ Ȗ N1P3 Metoda Meyerhof-a (Meyerhof, 1976)
F ݊ = 1.2 do 1.8 drenirani uslovi
2. Podaci o tlu: ݊’ = 20°, c` = 15 kN/m2 Metoda Meyerhof-a (Meyerhof, 1976)
Ȗ N1P3 F ݊ = 1.2 do 1.8, F c = 2 do 3 drenirani uslovi
3. Podaci o tlu: C u N3DȖ z = 20 kN/m3 API metoda (API, 1984)
F b = 2.5 do 3.0, F s = 1.5 do 2.5 nedrenirani uslovi
4. Podaci o tlu: krupnozrno tlo, q c = 5 Mpa LPC-CPT (Briaud, 2013)
F b = 2.5 do 3.0, F s = 1.5 do 2.5 na osnovu rezultata CPT opita
5. Podaci o tlu: ݊¶ GRȖ N1P3, Metoda Meyerhof-a (Meyerhof, 1976)
F ݊ = 1.5 drenirani uslovi
Razmatran samo PP2
Slika 2. Zavisnost potrebne dužine šipova od izbora modelskog faktora u funkciji ugla unutrašnjeg
trenja za PP2
Figure 2. Dependency of pile lengths on value of model factor for different values of soil friction
angle for DA2
DISKUSIJA DOBIJENIH REZULTATA
Ako VHQRVLYRVWãLSRYDRGUHÿXMHQDRVQRYXUH]XOWDWDWHUHQVNLKRSLWD–CPT opita (Slika 3 (d)

LK33GDMHQDMYHüLF u za pobijene šipove, dok PP3 daje najmanji F u . Ovakav rezultat je
GRQHNOHLRþHNLYDQX]LPDMXüLXRE]LUþLQMHQLFXGDsu za PP3 parcijalni faktori za nosivost
MHGQDNL L ]ERJ WRJD 33 QLMH DGHNYDWDQ ]D SURUDþXQ ãLSRYD DNR VH NRULVWH UH]XOWDWL
terenskih opita.
85
Slika 3. (a),(b),(c),(d) potrebne dužine šipova redom za primere 1.,2.,3. i 4.; (e),(f),(g),(h) ukupni
faktor sigurnosti redom za primere 1.,2.,3. i 4
Figure 3. (a),(b),(c),(d) needed pile lengths for num.examples 1.,2.,3. and 4.; (e),(f),(g),(h) total safety
factor for num.examples 1.,2.,3. and 4
86
S obzirom da PP1 za pobijene šipove daje vrednosti F u manje od 2.0, PRåHVH]DNOMXþLWLGD

PP2 osim što je najkonzervativniji, ujedno je i najkonzistentniji VDGRPDüRPSUDNVRP
$NR VH QRVLYRVW ãLSRYD RGUHÿXMH QD RVQRYX SDUDPHWDUD VPLþXüH RWSRUQRVWL WOD SRWUHEQD
dužina šipova i vrednost F u zavise ne samo od L]ERUDSURUDþXQVNRJSULVWXSDQHJRLRGL]ERUD
YUHGQRVWLPRGHOVNRJIDNWRUD=DYUHGQRVWLȖ M = 1.0 PP3 je najkonzervativniji, dok je PP1 za
pobijene šipove najmanje konzervativan. PP1 i PP2 kod krupnozrnih materijala (݊’ =35°)
GDMXVOLþQHSRWUHEQHGXåLQHãLSRYDNDRSURUDþXQSUHPDGRPDüHPSUDYLOQLNX]DYUHGQRVWLȖ M
GRN 33 postiže isti efekat za YUHGQRVWL Ȗ M – slika 3 (a i e). Za postizanje
PHþRYDQMDNod sitnozrnog tla (݊’ = 20° c’ = 15 kPa) za PP1 i PP2 potrebno je da Ȗ M
dok je za PP3 potrebno Ȗ M –slika 3 (b i f). Iz prethodnog sledi da vrednost ugla
XQXWUDãQMHJWUHQMDXWLþHQDWRNROLNDMHYUHGQRVWȖ M SRWUHEQDGDELVHGRELRUH]XOWDWVOLþDQ
SULPHQLGRPDüHJSUDYLOQLND7RVHQDMEROMHYLGLQDVOLFL]D33=DQLåHYUHGQRVWLXJOD
unXWUDãQMHJ WUHQMD ãWR RGJRYDUD VLWQR]UQRP WOX YUHGQRVWL Ȗ M GR GDMX VOLþQH
vrednosti potrebne dužine šipa i F u NDRSURUDþXQSUHPDGRPDüHPSUDYLOQLNX]D) ݊ = 1.5. Za
više vrednosti ugla unutrašnjeg trenja (što odgovara krupnozrnom tlu) vrednostima Ȗ M = 1.6
do preko 2.0 postižu se isti efekti.
=$./-8ý$.
3URUDþXQVNL SULVWXS ]D VYH YUVWH ãLSRYD L QDþLQH RGUHÿLYDQMD QRVLYRVWL WOD GDMH
QDMVOLþQLMHYUHGQRVWL potrebnih dužina šipova i F u NDRSURUDþXQSUHPDGRPDüHPSUDYLOQLNX
1D L]ERU PRGHOVNRJ IDNWRUD ]D RGDEUDQL SURUDþXQVNL SULVWXS QDMYLãH XWLþH YUHGQRVW XJOD
XQXWUDãQMHJWUHQMD=DUD]PDWUDQLUDVSRQXJODLSURUDþXQVNLSULVWXSYUHGQRVWȖ M VHNUHüHX
rasponu GR3RãWRMH]ERJMHGQRVWDYQRVWLSURUDþXQDSRWUHEQRGHILQLVDWLMHGLQVWYHQX
YUHGQRVWPRGHOVNRJIDNWRUD]DVYHSURUDþXQVNHVLWXDFLMHSUHSRUXþXMHVHYUHGQRVWȖ M = 1.5
GR ]D SURUDþXQ QRVLYRVWL ãLSRYD SUHPD (YURNRGX za PP2 ako se korite parametri
VPLþXüHRWSRUQRVWLWOD
LITERATURA:
American Petroleum Institute API.: Recommended Practise for Planning, Designing and Construction
Fixed Off-shore Platforms, API, Washington D.C 1984
Bond A., Harris A.: Decoding Eurocode 7, Taylor & Francis, 2008, ISBN 978-0-415-40948-3
Briaud J.L.: Geotechnical Engineering: Unsaturated and Saturated Soils. Wiley, 2013
Frank R.: Design of pile foundations following Eurocode 7, Proceedings XIII Danube-European
Conference on Geotechnical Enginnering, Ljubljana, 29-31 May 2006, Slovenian
Geotechnical Society, pp. 577-586.
Meyerhof G.G.: Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations. Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering Division Vol 102 No. GT3 (1976) 197-228
Orr T.L.L.: Design examples for the Eurocode 7 Workshop. Proceedings of the International
Workshop on the Evaluation of Eurocode 7, Trinity College, Dublin, 67-74, 2005a
Wang J., Wang Z., Cao Z.: A Comparative Study of Pile Design Using Eurocode 7 and RBD, ISGSR
2011 - Vogt, Schuppener, Straub & Bräu (eds) - © 2011 Bundesanstalt für Wasserbau ISBN
978-3-939230-01-4
87
Pregledni rad
006.44:624.13(4)
NEW GEOTECHNICAL STANDARDS IN

REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA AND THEIR
CORRESPONDING TO EUROCODES
Stoyna Kostova
„Todor Kableshkov” Higher School of Transport, „Geo Milev” str. 158,
Sofia,1574, Bulgaria
ABSTRACT
The new uniform norms for designing of building structures, called “Eurocodes” are valid
from 2005 in the European Union. Present report will observe primarily Eurocodes in the
field of the geotechnical engineering. Also will be made a comparison between Eurocode 7-
1[1] with new Bulgarian standards in same field. Implementation of Eurocodes is a major
challenge due to their significant differences comparing the Old Bulgarian standards. Current
report is focused on the first part of Eurocode 7[1] and Bulgarian National annex [2] of the
same standard. In the Bulgarian Standards concerning Geotechnical design is applied several
different partial factors. The report will learn the matter about partial factors for design values
of forces, soil capacity and soil characteristics. Most of the EU countries already changed
their Standards. In order to work better with other countries of the European Union, is
necessary to have good synchronization between their and our designing methods and
laboratory test methods of soil. This Eurocode 7-1 is officially approved into Bulgarian
language.
KEYWORDS: ȿXURFRGH 7, Geotechnical standards, partial factors
129,*(27(+1,ý.,67$1'$5',5(38%/,.(
BUGARSKE I 2'*29$5$-8û,EVROKODOVI
REZIME
1RYH MHGLQVWYHQH QRUPH ]D SURMHNWRYDQMH JUDÿHYLQVNLK NRQVWUXNFLMD SRG QD]LYRP
Ä(XURFRGHV³ YDåH RG X (YURSVNRM XQLML 2YDM L]YHãWDM üH SRVPDWUDWL SUHYDVKRGQR
(XURNRGRYHXREODVWLJHRWHKQLþNRJLQåHQMHUVWYD7DNRÿHüHVHXSRUHGLWL(XURFRGH-1 [1] sa
novim bugarskim standardima u istoj oblasti. Primjena Eurocodova je veliki izazov zbog
QMLKRYLK]QDþDMQLKUD]OLNDXSRUHÿHQMXVDVWDULPEXJDUVNLPVWDQGDUGLPD7UHQXWQLL]YHãWDM
fokusiran je na prvi deo Eurocode 7 [1] i bugarski Nacionalni aneks [2] istog standarda. U
EXJDUVNLP VWDQGDUGLPD NRML VH WLþX JHRWHKQLþNRJ SURMHNWRYDQMD SULPenjuje se nekoliko
UD]OLþLWLK SDUFLMDOQLK IDNWRUD 5DG SULND]XMH PDWHULMX R SDUFLMDOQLP IDNWRULPD ]D SURMHNWQH
YUHGQRVWLVLODNDSDFLWHWDWODLNDUDNWHULVWLNDWOD9HüLQD]HPDOMD(8MHYHüSURPHQLODVYRMH
VWDQGDUGH'DELVPREROMHVDUDÿLYDOLVDGUXJLP]HPOjama Evropske unije, neophodna je dobra
VLQKURQL]DFLMD L]PHÿX QMLKRYLK L QDãLK PHWRGD SURMHNWRYDQMD L ODERUDWRULMVNLK PHWRGD
ispitivanja tla. Ovaj Eurocode 7-]YDQLþQRMHRGREUHQQDEXJDUVNRPMH]LNX
./M8ý1(5(ý,(YURNRG*HRWHKQLþNLVWDQGDUGLSDUFLMalni faktori
88
INTRODUCTION
Eurocodes are European standards for the design of building structures, developed according
to the best European and world practice. They provide the highest technical quality of the
design of building structures. Eurocodes is a building code system developed by the European
Committee for Standardization (CEN). The EN Eurocodes about structural design are
developed from Technical Committee 250 of CEN (CEN/TC250). The members of CEN are
the National Standardization Bodies (NSBs) of the 28 European Union countries, the
Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey plus three countries of the European Free
Trade Association (Iceland, Norway and Switzerland). Technical Committee 56 /TC56/, like
in CEN, for design of building structures was established in Bulgaria, and take a part in
approving and adjusting the Eurocodes. The work on Euro standards in our country started
in 1996. At first the standards worked in their English version. After translation in Bulgarian
language there was some period of adoption and take into consideration the opinions of the
specialists.
Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 1: General rules BDS EN 1997-1: 2005 [1] is the
official publication in Bulgarian language of the European standard EN 1997-1: 2004. This
European Standard was adopted by CEN on 2004-04-23. This standard is the official edition
in Bulgarian. We are called this Standard Eurocode 7-1 [1]. It has been approved by the
Executive Director of the Bulgarian Institute for Standardization (BDS) on July 27, 2007.
The translation and regulation was made by specialist of Bulgarian Institute for
Standardization. From 2014 Eurocode 7-1 was mandatory for projects.
Building structures, for which there are no national Standards, are designed according to
Eurocodes.
EN 1997-1 is intended to be used as a general basis for the geotechnical aspects of the design
of buildings, civil engineering works and geotechnical structure. The subjects of EN 1997-1
in general are: principles of geotechnical design, geotechnical data, supervision of
construction, monitoring and maintenance, embankments, dewatering, ground improvement
and reinforcement of the earth base, spread foundations, pile foundations, anchorages,
retaining structures, hydraulic failure, overall stability and embankments.
EN 1997-1 included Annexes from A to J. Annex A recommended partial safety factor
values; Annexes B to J have internationally guidance for calculation of settlement, bearing
capacity, active and passive earth pressure and others.
At the moment, this standard works in conjunction with the national annex BDS EN
1997-1:2005 /NA/[2]. Last changes of the National annex were making at the beginning of
2015. According to them we changed some values of partial factors and design approaches.
All Euro standards for the building structure work together. There were 10 standards- from
Eurocode 0 [4] till Eurocode 9.
Geotechnical design Part 2: Ground investigation and testing - BDS EN 1997-2:2007 [3] was
the second standard in the field of Geotechnics. It considers laboratory and “in situ” testing
of soils.
CALCULATION METHODS AND GEOTECHNICAL CATEGORIES
In Eurocode 7-1 [1] for designing of geotechnical structure are used limit state method.
89
There are two types of limit states – ultimate limit states (ULS) and serviceability limit states
(SLS). In order to fulfill the SLS - conditions, the structure must cover the requirements for
normal exploitation and permissible maximum settlements and rotations.
Ultimate limit states are conditions which are related to human safety and /or construction
safety. Five types of ultimate limit states (ULS) are defined in Eurocod 7-1 namely:
- EQU- loss of equilibrium of the structure or ground;
- STR - internal destruction or unacceptable deformation of the structure or structure
elements, including single foundations, piles or basement walls, where the resistance of the
building materials is significant when the load-bearing capacity is ensured;
- HYD - Hydraulic gradients, internal erosion and soil erosion, caused by hydraulic gradients;
- UPL - loss of equilibrium of the structure or ground due to a water uplift caused by water
or other vertical impacts.
We have three types of geotechnical categories-1, 2 and 3, according to their complexity and
geotechnical risk. First category includes only small and simple structures with minimal risk.
Geotechnical category 2 refers to ordinary types of structures and foundations without
extreme risk, difficult foundation or loading conditions, like spread foundations, pile
foundations, anchorages, retaining structures, excavations, pillars of bridges, embankments
and earthworks, earth anchors, tunnels in solid, uncut rock, for which there is no water
tightness requirement and other special requirements.
Geotechnical category 3 refers to structures or their elements that do not included in the
geotechnical categories 1 and 2 such as: very large or unusual structures; high risk structures
with unusual or extremely severe soil conditions or loads; structures in areas with high
seismicity; structures in areas with possible unstable sites or with repeated displacements in
the soil array, requiring separate studies or special measurements.
DESIGN APPROACHES
According to 2.4.7.3.4 of Eurocode 7-1 we have three design approaches. They shall check
whether the limit state of destruction or unacceptable deformation will be reached by any
combination of a series of partial factors. The partial factors are given in Annex A of
Eurocode 7-1 [1] and in the National Annex [2] if there are some changes in values.
Design approach 1 (DA 1):
Combination 1: A1 “+” M1 “+” R1 (1)
Combination 2: A2 “+” M2 “+” R1, (2)
Design approach 2(DA 2): A1 “+” M1 “+” R2 (3)
Design approach 3(DA 3): (A1 * or A2 +) “+” M2 “+” R3” (4)
* for structural actions and + for geotechnical actions.
The "+" sign means "to be combined with".

The combinations with the corresponding letters indicate:
90
• "A" is series of partial factors for actions or effects of actions;

• "M" is series of partial factors for soil parameters;
• "R" is series of partial factors for bearing capacity.
Some European countries have chosen different Design approaches for different limit states
checks. In our National annex [2], a design approach 2 (DA 2) has been chosen for the
verification of the bearing capacity of the earth, for sliding check, for earth pressure, for
overturning check.
At first we have choose for all calculations DA 2, but now according to easy use the
calculating programs for slope stability we changed DA 2 to DA 3. And nowadays for
calculation of slope stability our country was crossed Design approach 3 (DA 3). On this
problem work our specialist in their articles [7], [8], [9],[10],[11].
We have to make Bearing capacity check for Ultimate limit states of structures and ground
basis in long-term and short-term situation. When considering the limit state of destruction
or unacceptable deformation of the ground (STR and GEO), the condition must be checked:
E d 5 d (5)
Design values of actions or effect of actions E d , should be smaller than design values of
capacity of structure and soil R d . Or it is the same check when we have stabilizing and
destabilizing actions.
E d ,dst d E d ,stb (6)
In other words here:

Ed,dst is the design value of effects of destabilizing actions, or the sum of active forces, as
we are accustomed to calling them;
And Ed,stb according to Eurocode 7-1 is design value of the effect of stabilizing reactions or
the sum of the passive forces, as we call them.
DESIGN VALUES AND CHARACTERISTIC VALUES OF ACTIONS,

GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS AND MATERIALS
1. Design values of actions.
When we make checks, any interaction between the structure and the ground must be taken
into account. Soil and rock characteristics, for design, must be obtained directly or through
correlations, theory or prognosis, test results or other appropriate sources.
The characteristic and representative values of the effects have to be determined according
to EN 1990[4] and the various parts of EN 1991 [5].
Design values of actions (Fd) have to be determined directly or obtained from representative
values using the following formulas:
F d = Ȗ F . F rep (7)
91
F rep ȥ . F k (8)
Where:
F d – design values of action;
F k – characteristic values of action;
Ȗ F – partial factor (coefficient) from the Annex A in Bulgarian standard [1]or from the
National annex [2];
F rep – representative values of action;
ȥ – factor for obtaining value for combination of variable action from Eurocod 0[4].
Where the design values of geotechnical actions F d are directly determined, the values of the
partial factors Ȗ F recommended in Annex A shall be used as a guide to the required level of
security.
Here ȥ, is a factor for combining actions in buildings and varies depending on the categories
of buildings and the type of variable impact (eg. ࣜLVXVHGIRURWKHUDFFRPpanying variable
effects). In the National Annex of Eurocod 0 Table NA.A1.1 [6] these partial factors are
given. Partial factors for actions and effect of actions according to Bulgarian national annex
[2] are given in (Table 1).
Table 1: Partial factor Ȗ F for actions or effects of actions Ȗ E according to NA Eurocode 7-1 [2]
Action Simbol Series Series

ȺȺ
Permanent
Unfavorable ȖG,unf 1,35 1,0
Favorable ȖG,fav 1,00 1,0
Variables
Unfavorable ȖQ,unf 1,5 1,3
Favorable ȖQ,fav 0 0
2. Design values of geotechnical parameters.
Characteristic values of geotechnical parameters c and ĳ should be based on the results and
the values obtained from laboratory and field tests, supplemented by well established
experience of specialists. The design value for the geotechnical parameters Xd is generally
derived from the characteristic value Xk of formula (9).
X d = X k /Ȗ M (9)
The partial factor Ȗ M in (9) for permanent and temporary situations is defined in National
Annex [2].
92
The values of the partial factors Ȗĳƍ , ȖFƍ , Ȗcu , Ȗqu and ȖȖ for the geotechnical parameters
are given in Table NA.1.[2]. These factor values shall be applied to geotechnical parameters
obtained after a method with statistical processing of test results. These factors correspond to
the “M2” or “M1” - series in the design approaches given in (Table. 2). After changing
geotechnical partial factors in our country it is common and recommended for all EU
countries. In the first national annex from 2005, the coefficients were Ȗĳƍ = 1.2, ȖFƍ .
In the Old Bulgarian standards [12] the security factor for cohesion was Ȗĳƍ = 1.2 and Ȗc ƍ
=1.8.
Table 2: Partial factors Ȗ M for geotechnical parameters according to Bulgarian standards BDS
Eurocode 7-1 NA [2]
Geotechnical parameters Simbol M1 M2

Friction angle a Ȗĳ' 1.0 1,25
Effective cohesion ȖFƍ 1.0 1,25
Undrained shear strength ȖFX 1.0 1,4
Strenght of axial pressure ȖTX 1.0 1,4
Unit weight ȖȖ 1.0 1,0
a This factor is applied for tanf '
3. Design values of geotechnical dates.
In cases where deviations in geometric data have a significant effect on the reliability of the
structure, the calculated value of the geometric data (ad) have to be determined either directly
or obtained from nominal values by the expression:
ɚ d ɚ nom ǻɚ (10)
Table 3: Partial factors for ground resistance Ȗ R of spread foundations according Bulgarian
standards Eurocod 7-1 [1] and NA [2]
Resistance Simbol Series Series Series
R1 R2 R3
Bearing capacity Ȗ R;v 1,0 1,4 1,0
Sliding Ȗ R;h 1,0 1,1 1,0
4. Design values for ground resistance of soil.
In (Table 3) are given partial factors for ground resistance for different series of design
approaches.
In our National annex [2] are given all values which are different from the annex A in
Eurocod 7-1.
93
We use design values in checks for Ultimate limit states, and characteristic values in checks
for Serviceability limit states of soil and structures. To assure normal work of structures and
buildings we can make checks using calculation methods, in situ load tests, table values,
computational models, experimental model tests, "observational method" and others.
The check for Serviceability limit states in the ground or in a structural parts, elements or
links have to fulfill the condition:
E d C d (11)
The values of the partial factors for the Serviceability limit states should be equal to 1.0.
That’s means we have to use characteristic values.
In National annex are given tables with maximum (limit) values for settlements and rotations
of different types of foundations of buildings. Also there are many partial factors for pile
foundations, and value of shaft resistance for driven piles and compressive pile resistance.
COMPUTER CALCULATIONS FOR SINGLE FOUNDATION
A flat foundation calculation with a computer program has been made.

Let's take a flat single foundation with sizes B = 2.5m, L = 3m and height hf = 1m and
foundation depth t = 1.5m, loaded with characteristic constant load Nk = 900 kN and
characteristic variable load Qk = 200 kN and moment from constant load Mx,k= 150 kN.m.
The soil characteristics at the foundation level and above it are the same, they refer to a single
layer with characteristic values ȖN N1P3, ĳk = 26 °, ck = 15 kN / m2.
Inserting these values in computational program “DC Footing” we received the decision
about the foundation. Imputed data and a part of results are given bellow on (fig.1 and fig 2):
94
Fig. 1. Imputed data and results of calculations according to Bulgarian standards BDS EN 1997-1 [1]
We are receiving results for different checks - for bearing capacity check, for equilibrium,
for sliding, for maximal soil pressure, for overturning, for settlement, for reinforcement of
foundation.
In table 4 are given data for bearing capacity of mentioned spread foundation. The
calculations are made for seven European countries.
95
Fig. 2. Results of calculations according to Bulgarian standards BDS EN 1997-1 [1]
Table 4: Bearing capacity of spread foundation according Eurocod 7-1 [1] for European countries
European Standard Rd Nd Nd/Rd< 1
EU Eurocod 7-1 5619.2 1834.31 0.33
German DIN EN 1997-1 and DIN1054:2010 5619.2 1834.31 0.33
Bulgaria BDS EN 1997-1 5619.2 1834.31 0.33
Austria Önorm B 1997-1-1 5619.2 1834.31 0.33
France NF EN1997-1 5619.2 1834.31 0.33
England BS EN 1997-1 4365.61 1358.75 0.31
Italy UNI EN 1997-1 and NTC 2008 3420.38 1766.38 0.52
Spain UNE EN 1997-1 2931.73 1358.75 0.46
CONCLUSIONS
As now the partial factors for soil characteristic in Republic of Bulgaria are like in Eurocod
7-1, and design approach DA-2 is used, the results is the same like German, Austria, France
and England. These countries obviously are choose the same partial factors too. See (Table
4).
96
We can make conclusion that different approaches and used partial factors give different
margin of safety for footing. For bearing capacity this safety are smaller than 50% for
presented countries.
Bulgarian specialists work and have gained considerable experience in the use of Eurocodes.
REFERENCES
[1]. BDS EN 1997-1: 2005Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 1: General rules in power from
2007-07-27.
[2]. BDS EN 1997-1: 2005 / NA Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design. Part 1: General rules. National
Annex.
[3]. BDS EN 1997-2: 2007 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 2: Ground investigation and
testing, 2015-02-17
[4]. BDS EN 1990 (Eurocode 0) Basis of structural design
[5]. BDS EN 1991 (Eurocode 1) Actions on structures
[6]. BDS EN 1990/ NA Eurocode 0 – Basis of structural design - National annex to BDS EN
1990:2003, 2012-01-31
[7]. Ch. Kolev, L. Mihova - Theoretical and field studies of soft ground for improvement with
reinforced pad , XV Danube - European Conference on Geotechnical Engineering (DECGE
2014), H. Brandl & D. Adam (eds.), 9-11 September 2014, Vienna, Austria, 2014.
[8]. Kostova St., Analysis of the procedure for designing of bearing capacity of the soils according to
Eurocode 7) Academic journal, Mechanics, Transport Communications ISSN 1312-3823 (print),
ISSN 2367-6620 (online), issue 16, number 3/3, art. ID: 1558 ɪ;,9-16- XIV-23, 2018.
[9].Michova L., Ch. Kolev, “Improvement of the Soil under the Concrete Pavement of a Plant’s
Hall”, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering, Paris 2013.
[10]. Mihova, L., Analysis of limit equilibrium slope stability methods. Magazine “Construction”,
No. 5, pp. 35-40, 2011
[11]. Mihova, L. Slope Stability according to Eurocode 7 and Eurocode 8. Magazine “Transportation
Engineering & Infrastructure”, No. 11, pp. 51-56, 2015
[12] Standards for Flat Foundation Design, 1996.
97
Pregledni rad
UDK 006.44:624(4)
*(27(+1,ý.2352-(.729$1-(PREMA
NOVOM PRAVILNIKU =$*5$Ĉ(9,16.(
KONSTRUKCIJE
0LUMDQD9XNLüHYLü*
*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWX%HRJUDGX, mirav@grf.bg.ac.rs
REZIME
U radu je dat pregled pravila za JHRWHKQLþNR SURMHNWRYDQMH NRMH VDGUåL QRYL 3UDYLOQLN ]D
JUDÿHYLQVNH NRQVWUXNFLMH 2SLVDQ MH NRQFHSW 3UDYLOQLND NRMLP VH RPRJXüDYD SULPHQD
XVYRMHQLK6536(1VWDQGDUGD]DSURMHNWRYDQMHLL]YRÿHQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMD'DWMH
kratak hronološki prikaz uvRÿHQMD(YURNRGRYDXGRPDüXWHKQLþNXUHJXODWLYXIzdvojeni su
bitni elementi Pravilnika NRML VH RGQRVH QD JHRWHKQLþNR SURMHNWRYDQMH VD NUDWNLP
komentarima i analizom, koji PRJX SRVOXåLWL JUDÿHYLQVNLP LQåHQMHULPD NDR NRULVQe
informacije o pravilniku NRMLüHbiti obavezni da primenjuju.
./-8ý1(5(ý,pravilnik, JUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMHevrokodovi, geotehnika
GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN ACCORDING TO NEW

BUILDING STRUCTURES RULE-BOOK
ABSTRACT
The paper gives an overview of the rules for geotechnical design, which contains a new
Rulebook for building structures. The concept of the Rulebook that enables the
implementation of the adopted SRPS EN standards for the design and construction of
buildimg structures is described A brief chronological overview of the introduction of
Eurocodes in domestic technical regulations is given. The essential elements of the Rulebook,
which relate to geotechnical design with brief comments and analysis, are highlighted. Thay
can serve civil engineers as useful information about the rulebook they will be required to
apply.
KEY WORDS: role-book, building constrctions, eurocodes, geotechnics
UVOD
8 GRPDüRM JUDÿHYLQVNRM WHKQLþNRM UHJXODWLYL ]D SURMHNWRYDQMH L L]YRÿHQMH JUDÿHYLQVNLK

objekata koriste se SRVHEQL SUDYLOQLFL R WHKQLþNLP QRUPDWLYLPD ]D UD]OLþLWH WLSRYH
NRQVWUXNFLMDEHWRQVNHþHOLþQHGUYHQH]LGDQHâWRVHWLþHWHPHOMDREMHNDWD, u upotrebi je
PUDYLOQLNRWHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]D temeljenje JUDÿHYLQVNLKREMHNDWD. Svi pomenuti
98
pravilnici su stupili na snagu NUDMHP RVDPGHVHWLK L SRþHWNRP GHYHGHVHWLK JRGLQD SURãORJ

veka i važili su na teritoriji bivše republike Jugoslavije.
U isto vreme, u Evropskoj uniji je VSURYRÿHQ SURJUDP (YURSVNe komisijH þLML MH cilj bio
XNODQMDQMHWHKQLþNLKSUHSUHNDXWUJRYLQLLXVNODÿLYDQMHWHKQLþNLKVSHFLILNDFLMDKomisija je
radila na uspostavljanju VNXSD KDUPRQL]RYDQLK WHKQLþNLK SUDYLOD ]D SURMHNWRYDQMH
JUDÿHYLQVNLK UDGRYD NRMi bi bili alternativa nacionalnim pravilima državama þODQLFDPD
Evropske unije (EU) i na kraju bi ih zamenili. Rezultat rada je bila prva generacija
Evrokodova (Eurocodes) u 1980-ima. Sporazumom Komisije, država þODQLFa EU i Evropske
asocijacije za slobodnu trgovinu (EFTA), priprema i objavljivanje Evrokodova su prenete
Evropskom komitetu za standardizaciju (CEN), da bi im se obezbedio buduüi status
evropskog standarda (EN). 2EMDYOMLYDQMH (YURNRGRYD X PDMX JRGLQH R]QDþLOR MH
prekretnicu u evrRSVNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DJUDÿHYLQDUVWYRMHUVXXYHGHQD]DMHGQLþNDWHKQLþND
pravila za projektovanje JUDÿHYLQVNLK NRQVWUXNFLMD Objavljeno je deset Evrokodova (EN
1990 - 1999). Šest (YURNRGRYD VH RGQRVH QD UD]OLþLWH WLSRYH NRQVWUXNFLMD prema vrsti
materijala, þHWLUL su ]DMHGQLþND u koje spada i Evrokod 7 (EN 1997), *HRWHKQLþNR
projektovanje (Slika 1).
Slika 1.
Figure 1.
U Preporuci Evropske Komisije (Commission Recommendation 2003/887/EC) o primeni i

XSRWUHEL (YURNRGRYD ]D JUDÿHYLQVNH UDGRYH L JUDÿHYLQVNH SURL]YRGH SUHSRUXþHQR MH
GUåDYDPDþODQLFDPDGD
usvoje Evrokodove kao pogodna pravila ]D SURMHNWRYDQMH JUDÿHYLQVNLK UDGRYD
SURYHUXPHKDQLþNHRWSRUQRVWLNRPSRQHQWLLOLSURYHUHVWDELOQRVWNRQVWUXNFLMD;
utvrde nacionalne parametre (NDP) koji se mogu koristiti na njihovoj teritoriji;
koriste SUHSRUXþHQH YUHGQRVWL 1'3-a koje pružaju Evrokodovi. Nacionalni
parametri bi trebalo da se razlikuju RG SUHSRUXþHQLK YUHGQRVWL VDPR WDPR JGH
99
geografski, JHRORãNL LOL NOLPDWVNL XVORYL LOL RGUHÿHQL QLYRL ]DãWLWH WR þLQH
neophodnim;
uporede nacionalne parametre NRMH SULPHQMXMH VYDND GUåDYD þODQLFD L SURFHQe
QMLKRYXWLFDMXSRJOHGXWHKQLþNLKUD]OLND]DUDGRYHLOLGHORYHUDGRYD;
preduzmu istraživanje sa ciljem integracije najnovijih dostignuüD QDXþQog i
tehnološkog znanja u Evrokodove.
3RþHWDNSULSUHPD]DXYRÿHQMD(YURNRGRYDXGRPDüXWHKQLþNXUHJXODWLYXVHYH]XMH]DSHULRG
od 1996-1999. godine, kroz realizaciju tehnološkog projekta *UDÿHYLQVNRJ IDNXOWHWD X
Beogradu "8YRÿHQMH(952.2'-ova i osvajanje novih metoda projektovanja proizvoda i
WHKQRORJLMH X JUDÿHYLQVNRP NRQVWUXNWHUVWYX 6UELMH NRMH MH ILQDQVLUDOR 0LQLVWDUVWYR ]D
nauku Republike Srbije. Rezultat projekta su bili prevodi do tada objavljenih Evrokodova,
kao i uporedne analize sa SURUDþXQom konstrukcija SUHPDGRPDüLPYDåHüLPSURSLVLPDBez
obzira što su (YURNRGRYLSUHWUSHOLGRVWDL]PHQDGRNRQDþQHYHU]LMHREMDYOMHQLSUHYRGLL]WRJ
perioda su poslužili za upoznavanje GRPDüH VWUXþQH javnosti sa osnovnim SURUDþXQVNLP
konceptom NRQVWUXNFLMDSUHPDJUDQLþQLPVWDQMLPD LSUREDELOVWLþNLPSULVWXSRPXRGQRVXQD
dejtva, uticaje od dejstava, parametre otpornosti i deformabilnosti (krutosti) materijala.
6WLFDQMHP VWDWXVD NDQGLGDWD ]D þODQVWYR X (YURSVNRM uniji 2012. godine, Srbija je, pored
ostalog, ]DSRþHODXVNODÿLYDQMH WDKQLþNe regulative sa standardima Evropske unijeþLPHVH
GRSULQRVL YHüRM NRQNXWHQWQRVWL GRPDüH SULYUHGH QD HYURSVNRP WUåLãWX Realizacija
KDUPRQL]DFLMH VWDQGDUGD X REODVWL JUDÿHYLQDUVWYD poverena je Institutu za standardizaciju
Srbije, koji je formirao NRPLVLMH]DVWDQGDUGHXREODVWLJUDÿHYLQDUVWYDNUDjem 2011. godine.
Rad komisija se odnosio na planiranje, pripremu, donošenje novih standarda i srodnih
dokumenata u skladu sa evropskim i SRYODþHQMH VWDULK. Komisije su uglavnom ostvarile
planirane zadatke i ciljeve, u YUHPHQX þLMD MH GXåLQD najviše bila uslovljena volonterskim
UDGRPþODQRYDNRPLVLMD
Usvajanjem novih SRPS-EN standarda i srodnih dokumenata, pojavili su se problemi sa

primenom SRVWRMHüLKSUDYLOQLNDRWHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMHkoji
VXVHSR]LYDOLQDSRYXþHQHVWDQGDUGH, tako da su predstavljali prepreku za primenu novih
standarda. 5HãHQMHP0LQLVWDUVWYDJUDÿHYLQDUVWYDNUDMHPJRGLQHIRUPLUDQDMHNRPLVija
]DSLVDQMHQRYRJ3UDYLOQLND]DJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMHNRMDMHNRQDþQLSUHGORJSUHGDODX
maju 2019. godine. 3UHGORJ MH EH] NRUHNFLMD SURãDR MDYQX UDVSUDYX L RþHNXMH VH QMHJRYR
usvajanje.
KONCEPCIJA I STRUKTURA NOVOG PRAVILNIKA
Komisiji je kao ugleGQL GRNXPHQW ]D SLVDQMH 3UDYLOQLND NRULVWLOD 7HKQLþNL SURSLV ]D
JUDÿHYLQVNH NRQVWUXNFLMH 5HSXEOLNH +UYDWVNH X]LPDMXüL X RE]LU GD VPR L SUH
XYRÿHQMDHYURSVNLKSURSLVDLPDOLVOLþQDLVNXVWYDkoristHüL ]DMHGQLþNHSURSLVHELYãHUHSXEOLNH
Jugoslavije. PrDYLOQLNMHNRQFLSLUDQWDNRGDREXKYDWDVYHWLSRYHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMD
za razliku od YDåHüLK ]DVHEQLK SUDYLOQLND R WHKQLþNLP QRUPDWLYLPD ]D VYDNL WLS 2YDNDY
NRQFHSWVHED]LUDQDþLQMHQLFLGDVX(YURNRGRYLNDRLGUXJLVURGQLVWDQGDUGLYHüXVYRMHQLNDo
WHKQLþNDSUDYLOD]DJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMHWDNRGDVHREMHGLQMHQLPNURYQLPSUDYLOQLNRP
100
daju opšte smernice za njihovu primenu. Predmet pravilnika (GHILQLVDQ X ýODQX ) je

SURSLVLYDQMH WHKQLþNLK VYRMVWDYD JUDÿHYLQVNLK NRQVWUXNFLMD ]DKWHYD ]D projektovanje,
L]YRÿHQMH RGUåDYDQMH L UXãHQMH RGQRVQR XNODQMDQMH L GUXJLK ]DKWHYD ]D JUDÿHYLQVNH
konstrukcije.
Pravilnik se generalno sastoji iz dva dela: opštih pravila i posebnih pravila. Opšta pravila su
podeljena u pet poglavlja:
I. Opšte odredbe
II. 3URMHNWRYDQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMD
III. ,]YRÿHQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXFLMD
IV. 2GUåDYDQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMD
V. 5HNRQVWUXNFLMDLUXãHQMHRGQRVQRXNODQMDQMHJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMH
2SãWDSUDYLODVHRGQRVHQDVYHWLSRYHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMDi proizvoda. Posebna pravila

SUDWH(YURNRGRYH]DUD]OLþLWHWLSRYHNRQVWUXNFLMD
Posebna pravila za betonske konstrukcije

3RVHEQDSUDYLOD]DþHOLþQHNRQVWUXNFLMH
3RVHEQDSUDYLOD]DVSUHJQXWHNRQVWUXNFLMHRGþHOLNDLEHWRQD
Posebna pravila za drvene konstrukcije
Posebna pravila za zidane konstrukcije
3RVHEQDSUDYLOD]DJHRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMHLJHRWHKQLþNHNRQVWUXNFLMH
3RVHEQDSUDYLOD]DSURMHNWRYDQMHVHL]PLþNLRWSRUQLKNRQVWUXNFLMD
Posebna pravila za svaki tip konstrukcije prema vrsti materijala se sastoji od: opšteg dela,
SUDYLOD ]D SURMHNWRYDQMH L]YRÿHQMH L RGUåDYDQMH 3RVHEQD SUDYLOD ]D JHRWHKQLþNR
SURMHNWRYDQMHLJHRWHKQLþNHNRQVWUXNFLMHVX]ERJVSHFLILþQRVWLGUXJDþLMHVWUXNWXUH, opisane u
VOHGHüHPSRJODYOMX.
35$9,/$=$*(27(+1,ý.2352-(.729$1-(,*(27(+1,ý.(
KONSTRUKCIJE
U opštem delu pravilnika, koji se odnosi na sve tipove konstrukcija, gde su date globalne
VPHUQLFHL]DKWHYL]DSURMHNWRYDQMHL]YRÿHQMHLRGUåDYDQMHNRQVWUXNFLMDJHRWHKQLþNLDVSHNW
MHVDGUåDQXþODQXparagrafa Opšta SUDYLOD]DSURMHNWRYDQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMD. U
stavu 9 tog þODQa se naglašava uloga odgovornog projektanta konstrukcije u fazi
JHRRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåQLKUDGRYDJGHVHQDYRGLGD Na obim, vrstu, prostorni raspored i faze
potrebnih iVWUDåQLKUDGRYDVDJODVQRVWGDMHRGJRYRUQLSURMHNWDQWJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMH".
S obzirom da se ne naglašava na koju fazu projektovanja se odnosi, jasno je da je projektant
XNOMXþHQXRGUHÿLYDQMHSRWUHEQLKLVWUDåQLKUDGRYD]DVYHID]Hprojektovanja. *HRWHKQLþND
LVWUDåLYDQMD VH SODQLUDMX WDNR GD RVLJXUDMX GRVWXSQRVW VYLK UHOHYDQWQLK JHRWHKQLþNLK
LQIRUPDFLMD L SRGDWDND X UD]OLþLWLP ID]DPD SURMHNWD *HRWHKQLþNH LQIRUPDFLMH PRUDMX ELWL
DGHNYDWQH]DXSUDYOMDQMHLGHQWLILNRYDQLPLRþHNLYDQLPprojektnim rizicima. Detaljan prikaz
faza, obima i vrsta istražnih radova su dati u poglavlju 2 (Planning of ground investigations)
101
Evrokoda 7 – *HRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMH– Deo 2: Istraživanje tla i ispitivanje. Nažalost,

ovaj deo Evrokoda 7 još nije preveden, usvojen je kao SRPS standard na engleskom jeziku.
3RVHEQDSUDYLOD]DJHRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMHLJHRWHKQLþNHNRQVWUXNFLMHVDVWRMHVHL]þHWLUL
dela:
*HRWHKQLþNLLVWUDåQLUDGRYLLL]YHãWDML
*HRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMHLJHRWHKQLþNLSRGDFL
*HRWHKQLþNLGHRJUDÿHYLQVNRJSURMHNWD
,]YRÿHQMHSRVHEQLKJHRWHKQLþNLKUDGRYD
U delu *HRWHKQLþNLLVWUDåQLUDGRYLLL]YHãWDML se definišu istražni radovi i navode SRPS EN

standardi prema kojima se istražni radovi sprovode þLML MHVSLVDN GDW XSULORJX 2.6.1
GeoteKQLþNR LVWUDåLYDQMH L LVSLWLYDQMH). 1D RYDM QDþLQ 3UDYLOQLN VWDYOMD YDQ VQDJH VYH
VWDQGDUGHNRULãüHQHSUHPDSUHWKRGQLPSUDYLOQLFLPD
8 RYRP GHOX VH GHILQLãH QDNRML VH QDþLQ XWYUÿXMXYrste, obim, prostorni raspored i faze
ispitivanja 7R VH þLQL kroz SURJUDP JHRWHKQLþNLK LVWUDåQLK UDGRYD X VNODGX V SUDYLOLPD
JHRWHKQLþNRJ SURMHNWRYDQMD X]LPDMXüL X RE]LU faktore koji mogu uticati na program
LVWUDåLYDQMD NDR ãWR VX VORåHQRVW JUDÿHYLQVNH NRQVWUXNFLMH XVORYH X WHPHOMQRP WOX
primenljivost vrste ispitLYDQMDQDRGUHÿHQXYUVWXWOD, uticaj na okolne objekte i td. Postupci i
UH]XOWDWLJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåQLKUDGRYDSULND]XMXVHXL]YHãWDMXRLVWUDåLYDQMXWHPHOMQRJWOD
LOLL]YHãWDMXRJHRWHKQLþNLPLVWUDåQLPUDGRYLPD
U delu *HRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMHLJHRWHKQLþNLSRGDFL se navodi koji se standardi primenjuju

]DJHRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMHNDRL]DSODQLUDQMHJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåLYDQMD: za projektovanje
srpski standard SRPS EN 1997-VDSULSDGDMXüLPQDFLRQDOQLPSULORJRP, a za planiranje i
WXPDþHQMHJHRWHKQLþNLKOaboratorijskih i terenskih opita primenjuje se srpski standard SRPS
EN 1997-VDSULSDGDMXüLPQDFLRQDOQLPSULORJRP (nije još usvojen).
*HRWHKQLþNR SURMHNWRYDQMH REXKYDWD L SURMHNWRYDQMH JUDÿHYLQVNLK NRQVWUXNFLMD þLML MH

RVQRYQL PDWHULMDO ]D JUDÿHQMH WOR nasipani kamen ili drugi nasipani materijal kao što je
rastresiti otpad.
*HRWHKQLþNR SURMHNWRYDQMH VSURYRGL VH QD RVQRYX JHRWHKQLþNLK SRGDWDND *HRWHKQLþNL

SRGDFLþLQH VNXSL]DEUDQLKLXWYUÿHQLKSRGDWDNDRYHOLþLQLLSURVWRUQRMUDVSRGHOLPHKDQLþNLK
svojstava temeljnog tla, temeljne stene, rastresitog materijala i podzemne vode*HRWHKQLþNL
SRGDFLVHGRELMDMXWXPDþHQMHPJHRWHKQLþNLKODERUDWRULMVNLKLWHUHQVNLKRSLWD
8 þODQX VH QDYRGL GD JHRWHKQLþNH SRGDWNH ELUD L XWYUÿXMH RGJRYRUQL Srojektant
LQWHUSUHWDFLMRP UH]XOWDWD JHRWHKQLþNLK LVWUDåQLK UDGRYD NDR L GUXJLK LVWUDåQLK UDGRYD L
SRGORJD SUHPD SUDYLOLPD JHRWHKQLþNRJ SURMHNWRYDQMD, kao i da ocenu vrste, obima i
SULPHUHQRVWLJHRWHKQLþNLKLGUXJLKLVWUDåQLKUDGRYDNRMLVOXåHLOLVXSRVOXåLOL]DXWYUÿLYDQMD
JHRWHKQLþNLKSRGDWDNDX]LPDMXüLXRE]LUXVORYHXWOXLVWHQLYUVWXLVORåHQRVWREMHNWDNDRL
UL]LNHSULVXWQHSULJUDÿHQMXGDMHRGJRYRUQLSURMHNWDQWXVNORSXJHRWHKQLþNRJSURMHNWRYDQMD
102
2YD GYD VWDYD QDYHGHQRJ þODQD SUHGVWDYOMDMX novinu u odnosu na prethodni pravilnik o
WHKQLþNLP QRUPDWYLPD, jer vrlo jasno definišu ulogu projektanta u kreiranju programa
istražnih radova kao i odgovornost ]DL]DEUDQHJHRWHKQLþNHSRGDWNHIRUPLUDQMHJHRWHKQLþNLK
SURUDþXQVNLKSURILODLVSURYRÿHQMDRGJRYDUDMXüLKJHRVWDWLþNLKSURUDþXQD
8RYRPGHOXSRVHEQLKSUDYLOD]DJHRWHKQLþNRSURMHNWRYDQMHVHVSHFLILFLUDLãWDJHRWHKQLþNR
SURMHNWRYDQMH REXKYDWD L]UDGX SURJUDPD LVWUDåQLK UDGRYD XWYUÿLYDQMH JHRWHKQLþNLK
podataka, ispunjenja osnovnih zahteva za oEMHNDW X SRJOHGX PHKDQLþNH RWSRUQRVWL
stabilnosti i trajnosti, izradu programa kontrole i osiguranja kvaliteta, izradu posebnih
WHKQLþNLKXVORYDJUDÿHQMD
U delu *HRWHKQLþNL GHRJUDÿHYLQVNRJ SURMHNWD VH GHILQLãH GD VYDNL SURMHNDW JUDÿHYLQVNH
konstrukciMH PRUD GD VDGUåL L JHRWHKQLþNL GHR, osim pri rekonstrukciji ako se dokaže da
rekonstrukcija nema bitan uticaj na nosivost, stabilnost i upotrebljivost temelja.
=$./-8ý&,
3UDYLOQLN]DJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMHSUHGVWDYOMD]DYUãQLWHKQLþNLGRNXPHQWXXVNODÿLYDQMX
WHKQLþNLK SURSLVD L] REODVWL JUDÿHYLQDUVWYD VD SURSLVLPD (YURSVNH XQLMH 3UDYLOQLN MH
NRQFLSLUDQ WDNR GD REXKYDWD VYH WLSRYH JUDÿHYLQVNLK NRQVWUXNFLMD ]D UD]OLNX RG YDåHüLK
]DVHEQLK SUDYLOQLND R WHKQLþNLP QRUPDWLYLPD ]D VYDNL WLS Ovakav koncept se bazira na
þLQMHQLFLGDVX(YURNRGRYLNDRLGUXJLVURGQLVWDQGDUGLYHüXVYRMHQLNDRWHKQLþNDSUDYLOD]D
JUDÿHYLQVNH NRQVWUXNFLMH WDNR GD VH REMHGLQMHQLP NURYQLP SUDYLOQLNRP GDMX RSãWH
VPHUQLFH ]D QMLKRYX SULPHQX 8 REODVWL JHRWHKQLþNRJ projektovanja, pored prelaska na
XVYRMHQH(1VWDQGDUGHGRQRVLRGUHÿHQHQRYLQHXGHILQLVDQMXXORJHSURMHNWDQWDXNUHLUDQMX
SURJUDPDLVWUDåQLKUDGRYDNDRLRGJRYRUQRVW]DL]DEUDQHJHRWHKQLþNHSRGDWNH i formiranje
JHRWHKQLþNLKSURUDþXQVNLKSURILOD.
LITERATURA:
Commission Recommendation 2003/887/EC on the implementation and use of Eurocodes for

construction works and structural construction products, Official Journal of the European
Union
3UDYLOQLNRWHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DWHPHOMHQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKREMHNDWDÄɋɥɭɠɛɟɧɢɥɢɫɬɋɎɊȳ´
ɛɪRM)
7HKQLþNLSURSLV]DJUDÿHYLQVNHNRQVWUXNFLMH11VWXSLRQDVQDJX)
103
6WUXþQLUDG
UDK 624.131.3(497.11)
*(27(+1,ý.$,675$ä,9$1-$ZA POTREBE
PROJEKTOVANJA I IZGRADNJE MOSTA
PREKO REKE SAVE NA MESTU STAROG
SAVSKOG MOSTA U BEOGRADU
%RãNR8ELSDULS9ODGLPLU)LOLSRYLü0LORã5DQNRYLü
6DREUDüDMQLLQVWLWXW&,3GRR, Nemanjina 6/IV, 11000 Beograd,

email: bosko.ubiparip@sicip.co.rs
REZIME
Na mestu tramvajskog mosta u Beogradu planirana je izgradnja novog mosta YHüLKJDEDULWD
koji WUHEDGDRPRJXüLEROMi protok YHüHJRELPDVDREUDüDMDXRYRPGHOXJUDGD=DSRWUHEH
SURMHNWRYDQMDLL]JUDGQMHQRYRJPRVWDNUDMHPJRGLQHL]YUãHQDVXWHUHQVNDJHRWHKQLþND
istraživanja i ispitivanja u obimu iz projektnog zadatka, a prema preporukama iz Evrokoda
EC7 o potrebnom stepenu istraženosti terena. U ovom radu su prikazani rezultati istraživanja
LLVSLWLYDQMDJHRWHKQLþNLPRGHOWHUHQDVDXVYRMHQLPWLSRPIXQGLUDQMDVWXERYDPRVWDNDRL
]QDþDM YHüHJ VWHSHQD LVWUDåHQRVWL WHUHQD VD DVSHNWD GHWDOMQRJ L ekonomski opravdanog
projektovanja velikih infrastrukturnih objekata.
./-8ý1(5(ý,JHRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDVWHSHQLVWUDåHQRVWLWHUHQDL]ERUQDþLQD
fundiranja
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS FOR THE

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE
OVER THE SAVA RIVER AT THE SITE OF THE
OLD SAVA RIVER BRIDGE IN BELGRADE
ABSTRACT
The construction of a new bridge of larger dimensions is planned at the site of the recent tram
bridge in Belgrade, which should enable better traffic flow in the city. For the purposes of
designing and constructing of the new bridge, field geotechnical investigations and testing
were carried out at the end of 2018, all in accordance with the Eurocode EC7
recommendations on the required level of field investigations. This paper presents the results
of investigations, the geotechnical terrain model with the adopted type of bridge pillar
foundation, as well as the importance of a higher level of terrain investigations in terms of
detailed and economically justified design of large infrastructural buildings.
KEY WORDS: geotechnical investigations, level of terrain investigation, selection of the

foundation type
104
UVOD
6RE]LURPGDSRVWRMHüLWUDPYDMVNLPRVWu Beogradu QLMHPRJXüHSURãLULWLQDQLYRXJUDGD

doneta je RGOXND R L]JUDGQML QRYRJ PRVWD YHüHJ JDEDULWD VD QRYLP SULVWXSQLP
VDREUDüDMQLFDPDNRMLELRPRJXüLOLSULKYDWDQMHSRYHüDQRJRELPD GUXPVNRJWUDPYDMVNRJ
ELFLNOLVWLþNRJLSHãDþNRJVDREUDüDMDL]PHÿXEHRJUDGVNHLQRYREHRJUDGVNHREDOH3RVWRMHüL
PRVWüHELWLGHPRQWLUDQLLVNRULãüHQQDGUXJRMORNDFLMLXJUDGX
6DJODVQR LGHMQRP UHãHQMX QRYRSURMHNWRYDQL PRVW MH WLSD GYRVWUXNRJ þHOLþQRJ OXND VD
]DWHJRPLLPDSRGYHVDREUDüDMQHWUDNHXVYDNRPVPHUXGYDWUDPYDMVNDPHWURNRORVHND
NDR L ELFLNOLVWLþNH L SHãDþNH VWDze. Ukupna dužina mosta je L=420,0 m, sa rasponima
L=54,0+73,0+166,0+73,0+54,0=420,0 m. Ukupna širina mosta je B=37,2 m (Na mestima
vidikovaca za pešake B=42,5 m). Glavni raspon konstrukcije preko zahtevanog plovnog
SURILOD RG P IRUPLUDQ MH VD GYD þHOLþQD OXND UDVSRQD / m. Položaj stubova i
SURMHNWRYDQLUDVSRQLRPRJXüDYDMXSRWSXQXSORYQRVWUHNH6DYHNUR]%HRJUDG
Slika 1. I]JOHGEXGXüHJPRVWDSUHNRUHNH6DYHX%HRJUDGX
Figure 1. The layout of the future bridge over the Sava River in Belgrade
Za potrebe projektovanja i izgradnje novog mosta, krajem 2018. godine6DREUDüDMQLLQVWLWXW

CIP d.o.o. izveo je WHUHQVNDJHRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDLLVSLWLYDQMDXRELPXL]SURMHNWQRJ]DGDWND
a prema preporukama iz Evrokoda EC7 o potrebnom stepenu istraženosti terena.
VRSTE I OBIM IZVEDENIH ISTRAŽIVANJA I ISPITIVANJA
Na mikrolokaciji novoprojektovanog mosta, obavljena su terenska istraživanja, koja su

obuhvatila inženjerskogeološko NDUWLUDQMH WHUHQD L]YRÿHQMH LVWUDåQLK EXãRWLQD RSLWD
VWDQGDUGQLKSHQHWUDFLMD637LRSLWDVWDWLþNLKSHQHWUDFLMD&37L&37X
(YURNRG (& SUHSRUXþXMH GD VH WHPHOML VSHFLMDOQLK NRQVWUXNFLMD NDR ãWR VX PRVWRYL
industrijska postrojenja i sl., istraže sa 2-LVWUDåQLKUDGRYDNRMLüHVHL]Yoditi do dubine koja
MHPLQLPXPSXWDYHüDRGãLULQHWHPHOMDLOLGRGXELQHVWHQRYLWHSRGORJH Saglasno tome
105
izvedeno je 17 istražnih bušotina ukupne dubine 593,80 m. Bušotine su izvedene na kopnu i

na reci poPRüXEDUåH3ULWRPHXUDÿHQHVXSRGYHLVWUDåQHEXãRWLQHX]RQLVYDNRJVWXEQRJ
PHVWDEXGXüHJPRVWDNDRLSRMHGQDEXãRWLQDXEOL]LQLlokacija EXGXüLKOLIWRYDLELFLNOLVWLþNLK
rampi. U istražnim bušotinama je izvedeno 26 opita standardne penetracije shodno standardu
BS 1377-9.
U cilju RGUHÿLYDQMD otporno-deformabilnih svojstava tla izvedeni su i opiti “in situ” VWDWLþNH
penetracije shodno standardima SRPS.U.B1.031 i SRPS EN ISO 22476-12. Pored NODVLþQRJ
(CPT) opita, na odabranim opitnim mestima, izvedeni su i opiti VWDWLþNH penetracije sa
pijezokonusom (CPTu). Svi opiti su izvedeni VWDWLþNLP penetrometrom sa frikcionim
konusom kapaciteta 200 kN, italijanskog SURL]YRÿDþD PAGANI TG 73-200. U neposrednoj
blizini lokacija prethodno izvedenih istražnih bušotina XUDÿHQR je osam (8) opita, do dubine
20-26 m. Pri tome 1 CPTu opit je izveden u zoni stubnog mesta S1, po 2 CPT opita u zoni
stubnog mesta S2 i po 1 CPT i CPTu opit u zoni stubnih mesta S5 i S6. Dodatni CPT opit
izveden je u zoni nožice nasipa u sklopu navoza na most na desnoj obali. Situacioni plan sa
rasporedom izvedenih istražnih radova prikazan je na slici 2.
Slika 2. Situacioni plan sa rasporedom istražnih radova

Figure 2. The layout plan with exploration points
Nakon završenih terenskih istražnih radova, u laboratorijskim uslovima, izvršeno je

LVSLWLYDQMHUHSUH]HQWDWLYQLKSRUHPHüHQLKLQHSRUHPHüHQLKX]RUDNDWODX]HWLKWRNRPLVWUDåQRJ
bušenja. Ispitivanjima su REXKYDüHQL uzorci tla i uzorci stena. Svi laboratorijski opiti su
izvedeni saglasno YDåHüLP EN i SRPS standardima u akreditovanoj laboratoriji.
REZULTATI *(27(+1,ý.,+,675$ŽIVANJA I ISPITIVANJA
Za opšte sagledavanje konstrukcije terena, u sedimentološkom i stratigrafskom pogledu,

analizirana su prethodna geološko-JHRWHKQLþND istraživanja koja su izvedena u široj zoni
EXGXüHJPRVWDSUHNRUHNH6DYH
U morfološkom pogledu istražni prostor obuhvata korito i aluvijalnu zaravan reke Save sa svim
odlikama YHüLK UHND UDYQLþDUVNRJ WLSD Osnovni reljef ovog terena nastao je erozionim i
DNXPXODWLYQLPUDGRPUHNH6DYHSULþHPXMHIRUPLUDQDSULREDOQDDOXYLMDOQD]DUDYDQ. Reljef
desne obale je negde od kraja XIX veka u više navrata modeliran, nasipanjem, zasecanjem i
LVNRSDYDQMLPD1DVLSDQMHVHRGQRVLORQDSUHWHåQR]DEDUHQHSRYUãLQHDVYDNDNRGDMHQDMYHüH
vezano za nekadašnju „Baru Venecija“ neposredno uz korito Save. U vreme regulisanja „Bare
106
Venecije“ izvršeno je nasipanja terena do kota 75.4 -76.6 m, kada je i izvršena urbanizacija
Sava male. Reljef leve obale reke Save je intenzivno modeliran nasipanjem neposredno pre II
svetskog rata, odnosno u periodu 1938-1941. godine. Tom prilikom izvršeno je nasipanje
refuliranim peskom, koji je kopan iz korita reke, do kote 76.0-76.5 PLL]JUDÿHQDMHREDORXWYUGD
i kej na savskoj obali. Nakon II svetskog rata, XJUDGVNRPSRGUXþMXUHNH6DYHGXåFHORJWRND
XYLãHID]DVXUDÿHQLRGEUDPEHQLQDVLSL
8JHRORãNRMJUDÿLGDWRJWHUHQDXþHVWYXMXWHUFLMDUQLQHRJHQLVHGLPHQWLprekriveni kvartarnim
aluvijalnim sedimentima i antropogenim nasipima.
1(2*(1,VHGLPHQWLVXXWYUÿHQLXVYLPLVWUDåQLPEXãRWLQDPD3ULWRPHPRJXVHL]GYRMLWL
oUJDQRJHQL NUHþQMDFL PDOH GR VUHGQMH þYUVWRüH 0 3 1 K) i laporoviti kompleks (M 3 2 L)
L]JUDÿHQ RG SUekonsolidovanih malo do manje stišljivih glinovitih lapora. .UHþQMDFL VX
XWYUÿHQL LVSRG JOLQRYLWLK ODSRUD QD %HRJUDGVNRM VWUDQL NDR L X NRULWX UHNH 6HYD QD
SURPHQOMLYRMGXELQL1DGHVQRM%HRJUDGVNRMREDOLUHNHXWYUÿHQLsu na dubini od 35,5 m (stub
S1) do 42 m (stub S2) od površine terena, dok su u koritu reke na dubini od 16 m (stub S3)
do 38 P VWXE 6 1D OHYRM 1RYREHRJUDGVNRM VWUDQL RYL VHGLPHQWL QLVX XWYUÿHQL GR
projektovane dubine istraživanja.
KVARTARNI sedimenti su predstavljeni aluvijalnim sedimentima, koji se sastoje od facije

povodnja (Q 2 apgp,p) i facije korita (Q 2 akp i Q 2 akšp) )DFLMD SRYRGQMD MH L]JUDÿHQD RG
nekonsolidovanih glinovitih prašina i glinovito-peskovitih prašina, vanredne stišljivosti, koje
se nalaze neposredno ispod nasipa. 6HGLPHQWL IDFLMH NRULWD L]JUDÿXMX QDMGXEOMH GHORYH
DOXYLMDOQLKVHGLPHQDWDDL]JUDÿHQLVXRGVUHGQMHGRGREUR]ELMHQLKYRGRQRVQLKSHVNRYDL
ãOMXQNRYDVDQHSUDYLOQLPYHUWLNDOQLPLERþQLPPHÿXVREQLPSUHOD]LPD
NASIPI (n) prekrivaju površinske delove terena na celom istražnom lokalitetu, izuzev u
NRULWX UHNH 6DYH 0DNVLPDOQD XWYUÿHQD GHEOMLQD QDVLSD MH m. Na desnoj obali je vrlo
heterogenog sastava, sastoji se od nevezanih i vezanih materijala sa nejednakim lokalnim
XþHãüHP JUDÿHYLQVNRJ ãXWD SURPHQOMLYH Nonzistencije i stepena zbijenosti, uglavnom
QHNRQVROLGRYDQGRVODER]ELMHQ1DOHYRMREDOL6DYHQDVLSMHXMHGQDþHQLMHJVDVWDYDLL]JUDÿHQ
je od refuliranog peska, koji je uglavnom srednje zbijen.
Istražna lokacija je u složenim hidrogeološkim uslovima. Glavna izdan podzemne vode je

]ELMHQRJWLSDL]JUDÿHQDRGDOXYLMDOQLKSUDãLQDVWLKSHVNRYDLãOMXQNRYDVDPHÿX]UQVNLPWLSRP
SRUR]QRVWL9RGHL]RYHL]GDQLVXXGLUHNWQRMKLGUDXOLþNRMYH]LVDYRGDPDUHke Save, a nivo
podzemne vode u njoj varira u istom režimu kao i nivo vode u reci. Prihranjivanje izdani vrši
VH UHNRP 6DYRP D GHORP GUHQLUDQMHP SRG]HPQH YRGH L] VPHUD SDGLQH X ]DOHÿX GHORP
infiltriranjem atmosferilija, a delom „gubicima“ iz vodovodne i kanalizacione mreže. U periodu
L]YRÿHQMD LVWUDåLYDQMD QLYR SRG]HPQH YRGH se nalazio na dubini 4.30-5.20 m od površine
terena, što je odgovaralo i tadašnjem nivou reke Save. 8VSUXGQLPRUJDQRJHQLPNUHþQMDFLPD
je formirana druga, niža izdan podzemne vode, koja je izolovana od gornje izdani debelim
laporovitim paketom.
107
*(27(+1,ý.,86/29,)81',5$1JA OBJEKATA
2ELPLUD]QRYUVQRVWJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåQLKUDGRYDNRMLVXL]YHGHQLQDSUHGPHWQRMORNDFLML
RPRJXüLOLVXUDFLRQDODQL]ERUGXELQHIXQGLUDQMDãLSRYD7LPHVXQHSUHGYLÿHQHRNROQRVWLu
WRNXL]YRÿHQMDVDJHRWHKQLþNRJDVSHNWDsvedene na minimum. Usvojeni parameWULIL]LþNR-
PHKDQLþNLKNDUDNWHULVWLNDL]GYRMHQLKJHRWHKQLþNLKVUHGLQDSULND]DQLVXXVOHGHüRMWDEHOL
Tabla 1. 8VYRMHQLSDUDPHWULIL]LþNR-PHKDQLþNLKNDUDNWHULVWLNDL]GYRMHQLKJHRWHKQLþNLKVUHGLQD
Table 1. Adopted physical-mechanical properties of chosen geotechnical layers
Oznaka Ugao unutrašnjeg Zapreminska Jednoaksijalna
Kohezija Modul stišljivosti
JHRWHKQLþNH trenja težina þYUVWRüD
sredine M' (o) c' (kN/m2) J (J') (kN/m3) Mv (kN/m2) q n (kPa)
n tg 26 5 18 (11) 5000 < 200
Q 2 apgp,p 17 15 18,5 (11) 3000 - 4000 < 100
Q 2 akp 30-32 0 18 (11) 10000 - 15000 -
Q 2 akšp 35-38 0 18,5 (11) 25000 - 50000 -
M32 L 17 25 18,8 23000 - 35000 250 - 500
M31 K 41 150 22 (E d ) 150000 15000
M 3 1 K* 39 0 22 (11) 50000 -
.RQVWUXNFLMD EXGXüHJ mosta preko reke Save VH RVODQMD QD VWXERYD VD PHÿXVREQLP
rastojanjem 54,0+73,0+166,0+73,0+54,0 m, tako da je ukupna dužina mosta L= 420 m.
,GHMQLP SURMHNWRP MH SUHGYLÿHQR GXERNR IXQGLUDQMD VWXERYD PRVWD QD ãLSRYLPD SUHþQLND
1500 mm, dužine L= 20-30 m. Šipovi su projektovani u baterijama od 14 do 20 šipova, na
PHÿXVREQRP UDVWRMDQMX RG P 0HÿXVREQR VX SRYH]DQL QDJODYQLP JUHGDPD RGQRVQR
QDJODYQLPSORþDPD 3URMHNWRYDQHVLOHSRãLSX]DVWDOQRRSWHUHüHQMHL]QRVH* 756 - 6150 kN,
dok su maksimalne sile u rasponu K= 1285 - 8659 kN.
3UHPDXWYUÿHQRMNRQVWUXNFLMLRVODQMDQMHãLSRYDüHVHREDYLWLXUD]OLþLWLPVUHGLQDPD%DWHULMH
ãLSRYD QD VWXEQLP PHVWLPD 6 6 6 L 6 ELüH IXQGLUDQL X ODSRULPD M 3 2 L), šipovi na
stubnom mestu 6XRUJDQRJHQLPNUHþQMDFLPD0 3 1 K), a šipovi na stubnom mestu S6 u
šljunkovito-peskovitom nanosu (Q 2 akšp). Podužni inženjerskogeološki presek po osi mosta
prikazan je na slici 3.
Slika 3. Inženjerskogeološki presek terena po osovini mosta

Figure 3. Engineering-geological section on the bridge axis
108
'R]YROMHQDQRVLYRVWSRMHGLQDþQLKãLSRYDGRELMHQDMHPHWRGDPDSUHPD3UDYLOQLNXRWHKQLþNLP
QRUPDWLYLPD ]D WHPHOMHQMH JUDÿHYLQVNLK REMHNDWD 6O *ODVQLN EU NDR L PHWRGDPD
prema EN-1997-2 i LCPC (Bustamante&Gianeselli, 1982), a na osnovu rezultata CPT opita.
Vrednosti dozvoljHQLKRSWHUHüHQMDGR]YRljena vrednost sile po šipu) su YHüe od maksimalno

projektovane sile NRMX SRMHGLQDþQL ãLS SUHQRVL QD WOR WH VH PRåH VPDWUDWL GD MH VWDELOQRVW
REMHNWDQDSURORPWODREH]EHÿHQD
3UHPD VSURYHGHQLP DQDOL]DPD SURJQR]QRJ VOHJDQMD PRJX VH RþHNLYDWL VOHJDQMD EDWHULMH
šipova u granicama od s = 1,8 - 6,0 cm.
=$./-8ý$.
Ovim JHRWHKQLþNLP LVWUDåLYDQMLPD SRWYUÿHQD MH RSãWD JHRORãND JUDÿD WHUHQD mikrolokacije
novog savskog mostaXWYUÿHQDSUHWKRGQLPLVWUDåLYDQMLPD0HÿXWLPYHüLPRELPRPL]YHGHQLK
LVWUDåQLKUDGRYDNRMLVXSRNULOL VYDNRVWXEQRPHVWREXGXüHJPRVWDVDPLQLPXPistražne
WDþNH XRþHQD VX ]QDþDMQD RGVWXSDQMD SURVWLUDQMD L ]DOHJDQMD JHRWHKQLþNLK MHGLQLFD, kako u
vertikalnom, tako i u lateralnom pravcu, u odnosu na prognozni presek terena koji je prethodno
XUDÿHQQDRVQRYXIRQGRYVNHGRNXPHQWDFLMH2YRVHSRVHEQRRGQRsi na položaj i dubinu stena
karbonatno-laporovitog kompleksa koji je izdvojen kao adekvatna sredina za oslanjanje temelja
projektovanog mosta. Sve ovo je imalo neposredan uticaj na izbor broja i dužine šipova u
sklopu temelja na svakom SRMHGLQDþQRPstubnom mestu.
=QDþDMQLMDRGVWXSDQMDUHJLVWURYDQDVXQDGHVQRMEHRJUDGVNRM obali Save, kao i u koritu reke,

odnosno u zoni stubnih mesta 66L67DNRMHX]RQLVWXED6XWYUÿHQDSDOHRGHSUHVLMDX
RNYLUX VSUXGQLK NUHþQMDND X NRMRM VX QDNQDGQR LVWDORåHQL MH]HUVNL ODSRURYLWL VHGLPHQWL
5HODWLYQR XQLIRUPQD JHRORãND JUDÿD WHUHQD QD QRYREHRJUDGVNRM VWUDQL VH PLQLPDOQR
razlikuje u odnosu na geološku JUDÿXGHILQLVDQXSUHWKRGQLPLVWUDåLYDQMLPD
VHüi stepen istraženosti terena, usaglašen sa preporukama iz Evrokoda EC7, RPRJXüDYD

racionalnije projektovanje objekata XVPLVOXWDþQLMHJGHILQLVDQMDtipa i dubine temeljenja. Na
WDM QDþLQ VH na minimum smanjuju odstupanja stvarno izvedenih objekata u odnosu na
projektna rešenja. 2YGH MH SRWUHEQR QDSRPHQXWL GD MH L X RNYLUX Ä3UDYLOQLND R WHKQLþNLP
QRUPDWLYLPD]DWHPHOMHQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKREMHNDWD³6OOLVW6)5-EUWDNRÿHGHILQLVDQ
potreban obim istraživanja za sve faze projektovanja, koji ne odstupa znatno u odnosu na
(&DOLVHRQXSUDNVLþHVWRQHSRãWXMH
LITERATURA:
Ubiparip B.: Idejni projekta mosta preko reke Save na mestu starog savskog mosta u Beogradu, E01
(ODERUDWRUH]XOWDWLPDJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåLYDQMDLLVSLWLYDQMDWHUHQD6DREUDüDMQLLQVWLWXW&,3
d.o.o. Beograd. 2019.
6WDQRMNRYLü. J.: Izgradnja mosta preko reke Save na mestu starog savskog mosta, Projekat detaljnih
JHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåLYDQMD6DREUDüDMQLLQVWLWXW&,3GRR%HRJUDG8.
EN 1997-2 (2007): Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 2: Ground investigation and testing.
Pravilnik o WHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DWHPHOMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKREMHNDWD6OXåEHQLOLVW6)5-EURM
109
6WUXþQLrad
UDK 624.131.3
*(27(+1,ý., ASPEKTI KAO PODLOGA

PROJEKTOVANJA OBJEKATA
VISOKOGRADNJE U URBANIM SREDINAMA-
PRIMERI IZ PRAKSE
=ODWDäXMRYLü
Opštinska uprava Lajkovac,Omladinski trg broj 1,Lajkovac
REZIME
U radu je dat prikaz SRVWRMHüLKSRVORYQR-stambenih objekata,za koje u vreme gradnje nije
bilo kontrole tla, kao i objekat koji se QDGRJUDÿXMH Poslovno-stambeni objekat,gde je u toku
L]YRÿHQMHUDGRYDQDOD]LVH XRNUXåHQMXJUDGVNHNXüHX/DMNRYFX gradi se prema elaboratu
geomHKDQLþNLK UDGRYD,koji je podloga projektovanju. Na nekoliko objekata u Lajkovcu je
XRþHQR prisustvo vode u podrumskim ostavama,koje su prisutne kao posledica gradnje u
EOL]LQLSRVWRMHüLKEXQDUDLOLQHRGJRYDUDMXüHSULPHQHL]RODFLRQLKmaterijala,ili neprimenjenih
hidroizolacionih materijala u JUDÿHYLnarstvu u vremenu gradnje. Podstrek za brigu o
postojHüHPVWDPEHQRPIRQGXX/DMNRYFXzainteresovala je nadležne u smislu unapreÿHQMD
uslova stanovanja i zakonska obaveza sagledavanja stanja objekata u smislu uštede energije
LRWNORQDSRVOHGLFDQHSUDYLOQRJIXQGLUDQMDREMHNDWDVDJUDÿHQLKSUHSHW-šest decenija. Zakon
o stanovanju i održavanju stambenih zgrada(„Sl.gl.RS“br.104/2016) u primeni je i nastoji se
da se izvedu potrebni radovi na postojeüHPVWDPEHQRPIRQGXUDGLVSUHþDYDQMDSURSDGDQMD
./-8ý1(5(ý, HODERUDWJHRWHKQLþNLKUDGRYD]DNRQVNDREDYH]Dinspekcijsko postupanje
GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS AS THE BASIS OF

DESIGN IN URBAN ENVIRONMENT -
EXAMPLES FROM PRACTICE
ABSTRACT
The paper gives an overview of existing commercial and residential buildings, for which no
soil control at the time of construction was performed. The office - residential building, where
the works are in progress, is located in vicinity of Lajkovac city hall. It is being built according
to the results of geomechanical study and the design. In several buildings in Lajkovac, the
presence of water in basement was observed, due to construction near existing wells, or
inadequate use of insulation materials, or absence of waterproofing materials. The city of
Lajkovac authorities tends to improve housing conditions as well as to enforce energy
efficiency and to improve foundations of buildings built five to six decades ago. The Law on
Housing and Maintenance of Residential Buildings ("Sl.gl.RS" No.104 / 2016) is being
implemented in order to prevent deterioration of buildings.
KEY WORDS: geotechnical works study, legal obligation, inspection procedure

110
UVOD
Stambeno-poslovni objekti u Lajkovcu JUDÿHQL V SRþHWNDdruge polovine 20.og veka nisu
podrazumevali izolovanje objekata i hidrotehnišku zaštitu,a projektanti nisu imali podatke o
ispitivanju tla,kao podlogu projektovanju.Zbog toga su prisutne višedecenijske posledice u
nekoliko REMHNDWD NRML VX VDJUDÿHQL u glavnoj ulici- 9RMYRGH 0LãLüD X /DMNRYFX,gda su
podrumi puni vode ili se voda pojavlMXMHXYUHPHYHüLKNLãQLKSDGDYLQD.
Radi produženja životnog veka objekata,briga o stambeno-poslovnim objektima
SRGUD]XPHYD REDYH]X VWDPEHQLK ]DMHGQLFD GD SULNXSOMDQMHP VUHGVWDYD L L]YRÿHQMHP
SRWUHEQLK UDGRYD XþLQH SRGRbnijim životni i radni prostor.U objektima gde je prisutna
voda,prostori nisu GRVWXSQL]DNRULãüHQMH,pa i ako su u pitanju podrumske ostave,potrebno je
da se koriste za šta su namenjeneNDR GHR SULSDGDMXüHJ VWDPEHQRJ SURVWRUD 7DNRÿH MH
SULVXWQDGHIRUPDFLMDWURWRDUDRNRREMHNDWDXOHJQXüDãDKWLQHSRVWRMDQMHSRNlopaca, kaneleta,
nekontrolisanog oticanja kišne vode,zaGUåDYDQMHYHüHNROLþLQHYRGHXXOLFDPDNRMHSRMDYH
su posledica nepropisnog odvodnjavanja i nepoznavanja geomehanike terena.
DXJRJRGLãQMD QHEULJD VH VDQNFLRQLãH SUDYLOQLP SULVWXSRP UD]JUDQLþHQMD
problematike,RGUHÿLYDQMHP QDGOHåQRVWL ]D RWNODQMDQMH SRVOHGLFD L SUDYLOQRP SULPHQRP
zakonskih odredaba. Kada se prethodno usvoji Odluka nalaže planiranje finansijskih
sredstava.
STANJE STAMBENO-POSL291,+2%-(.$7$*5$Ĉ(1,+8'58*2-
POLOVINI 20.VEKA
Slika 1: Prisustvo vode u podrumu objekta

Figure 1: Building with waterr present in the basement
111
Poslovno-stambeni objekat spratnosti Po3 VDJUDÿHQ SRþHWNRP -ih godina prošlog

veka,ima stalno prisutnu vodu u podrumskim prostorijama,iz razloga što je objekat izveden
X EOL]LQL SRVWRMHüHJ EXQDUDNRMD VHüDQMD SRWNUHSOMXMX SULþH VWDULMLK VXJUDÿDQD kada su
LQGLYLGXDOQDGRPDüLQVWYDXYHüLQLVOXþDMHYDLPDODEXQDUHXGYRULãWLPD Drugi razlog stalnog
prisustva vode u podrumu objekta je zbog slivanja vode sa viših terena(Doma
zdravlja,srednje i osnovne škole)u podrumske prostorije. Predstoji rešavanje navedene
problematike,za koju je u toku prikupljanje podataka i planiranje sredstava za regulisanje
podzemnih i površinskih voda,kao i odvodnjavanje iz podrumskih ostava drenažnim
URYRYLPDLRYRÿHQMHPNDUHFL.ROXEDUL
STAMBENI OBJEKAT U UL.POP BOŠKOVA BROJ 2
2EMHNDWMHJUDÿHQRG-2006.god. sSUDWQRVWREMHNWDMH3R3UD]XÿHQHRVQRYHSRNULYHQ
GYRYRGQRPNURYQRPNRQVWUXNFLMRPSRNULYDþ-opekarski crep.
3ULOLNRP SULEDYOMDQMD XVORYD ]D SULNMXþHQMH QD YRGRYRGQX L NDQDlizacionu mrežu nije se
vodilo UDþXQDRSRYHüDQRMNROLþLQLNLãQHYRGHXXOLFDPDNRMHVHVXþHOMDYDMX,kada dolazi do
SXQMHQMD ãDKWL L XOLYDQMD YHüH NROLþLQH YRGH X SRGUXPVNH RVWDYH QDYHGHQRJ REMHNWD.
-.3³*UDGVNDþLVWRüD³MHREDYLODSULNOMXþLYDQMHL]REMHNWDGRXOLþQHãDKWHQHYRGHüLUDþXQa o
SRYHüDQRMNROLþLQLNLãQLKYRGDQDQDYHGHQRMORNDFLMLDLVWXSUREOHPDWLNXQLMHX]HRXRE]LU
SURMHNWDQWUHYLGHQWLSURMHNWDRGQRVQRWHKQLþNDNRPLVLMD
Sl. 2 i 3: Objekat u ul.pop Boškova 2

Figure 2 i 3: Buildings in pop Boskova st. 2
112
Uoþeno je da je isti sastav Komisije ]DWHKQLþNLSUHJOHGREMHNWDL revizije projekta,što Zakon

RSODQLUDQMXLL]JUDGQMLQHGR]YROMDYD3UHJOHGRPGRNXPHQWDFLMHNRMXMHVDþLQLOD.RPLVLMD]D
WHKQLþNLSUHJOHGREMHNWDXRþHQRMHGD nije kontrolisano RGYRÿHQMe prljave vode iz objekta,da
priNOMXþHQMHQa najbližu XOLþQu šahtu nije pravilno rešenje, zbog situacije kada se prilikom
velikih padavina u ulici zadržava više od 15 cm vode kada dolazi do prelivanja kišnih
padavina,ulivanja u šahtu i punjenje podrumskih ostava prljavom vodom.
Preduzete su mere na ukazivanje nepravilnosti,pre svega dopisima.Interveniše po potrebi

.RPXQDOQRSUHGX]Hüe.Objekat je finansiran sredstvima Fonda solidarne stambene izgradnje,
preko- u to vreme JP “ 'LUHNFLMD ]D XUHÿHQMH L L]JUDGQMX RSãWLQH /DMNRYDF“,a potom od
01.12.2016.god. pravni sledbenik je Opština Lajkovac.Pisani zahtevi stanara zgrade su
usledili po useljenju na okolnost navedenih nepravilnosti LSURSXVWDUHOHYDQWQLKXþHVQLNDX
SRVWXSNXSURMHNWRYDQMDL]YRÿHQMDLWHKQLþNHNRQWUROHREMHNWD
NADOGRADNJA POSLOVNO-STAMBENOG OBJEKTA
Na poslovno-stambenom objektu spratnosti P+4 u ul.Vladike Nikolaja VelimiroYLüa broj 6

obavlja se nado gradnja objekta gde je zahtev stanara bio da se ravan krov zameni novim, sa
kosim krovnim ravnima,zbog problema prokišnjavanja, te da se nadoknadom stanarima uradi
termoizolaciona fasadna zaštita objekta,u smislu poboljšanja uslova stanovanja i manje
potrošnje energije za zagrevanje objekta.
Sl. 4 i 5: Objekat P+4 – nadogradnja

Figure 4 i 5: Building with 4 storeza and the upgrade
Investitor i projektant su u odsustvu mere i dobre prakse poštovanja propisa,odstupili od

usvojenog Plana generalne regulacije Lajkovac centrane zone („Sl.gl.Opštine Lajkovac“broj
113
5/2015 i 14/2018),projektovali nadogradnju objekta u dva nivoa, što predstavlja odstupanje i

nije izgradnja potkrovlja, koja je kroz Informaciju o lokaciji broj: 350-32/2016-03 od
14.03.2016.god. dostavljenaYHüL]JUDGQMDGYDQLYRD.
Po obavljenoj inspekcijskoj kontroli dana 15.03.2019.god.zapisnikom je konstatovana

odstupljenost u projektnoj dokumentaciji i blagovremeno je dostavljena informacija
investitoru i projektantu dana 04.04. 2019.god. kada su mogli da se koriguju i ispoštuju
usvojenu plansku dokumentacijuMHUVXUDGRYLELOLXID]LGHPRQWLUDQMDSRVWRMHüHUDvne terase.
=DREMHNWHNRMLVHQDGRJUDÿXMXLQVSHNFLMVNRSRVWXSDQMH,kao redovno je po završetku radova
u konstuktivnom smislu-prema objedinjenoj proceduri,što u navedenoj situaciji predstavlja
odstupanje od usvojenog Plana.
*UDÿHYLQVNDLQVSHNFLMDMHdostavila Informaciju sa objekta nadogradnje Komisiji za planove

Opštine Lajkovac,tako da je dato i njihovo mišljenje za navedenu nadogradnju objekta-na
slikanom prilogu s.4 i5 vidljivo.Zakonska odredba Zakona o planiranju i izgradnji ukazuje
da su odgovorQL LQYHVWLWRU L SURMHNWDQW X VOXþDMX QHåHOMHQLK SRVOHGLFD]ERJ QHSR]QDYDQMD
osobina tla, HYHQWXDOQRJ SUHNRUDþHQMD X RSWHUHüHQMX nedovoljnog DUPLUDQMD SRVWRMHüHJ
objekta za izvedena dva nivoa, ukoliko se dogodi nepravilno sleganje objekta. Evidentno je
da revident nije stavio primedbe na projekat.
POSLOVNO STAMBENI OBJEKAT-BANKA INTESA
2EMHNDWMHVDJUDÿHQ-tih godina prošlog veka,spratnosti P+4,sa prizemnim delom u kome

MH ]D SRWUHEH EDQND ,QWHVH XUDÿHQR SRGQR JUHMDQMH,gde je izvor termalne prirode. Tlo na
QD]QDþHQRM ORNDFLML je dobrih karakteristika,tako da je bušenje do dubine d=13,50 m, za
potrebe L]YRÿHQMDWHUPDOQRJJUHMDQMD u prizemlju je izveden podni sistem..RGRYRJQDþLQD
JUHMDQMD L KODÿHQMD L]YRÿHQMH EXãHQMD X WOX, nabavka opreme L VDPR L]YRÿHQMH UDGRYD MH
VNXSOMHQHJRNODVLþQLPQDþLQRPDOLVXWURãNRYLXWRNX eksploatacije niži i na strani zaštite
åLYRWQRJLUDGQRJSURVWRUDãWRWUHEDGDSRVWDQHSUDNVDXEXGXüQRVWL
Sl.6 i 7: Poslovno-stambeni objekat-banka“Intesa“

Figure 6 i 7: Office – residential building „Intesa“
114
POSLOVNO-STAMBENI OBJEKAT Po+P+4+Ps u ul. Vladike Nikolaja

9HOLPLURYLüDEU5
=DNRQVNDREDYH]DMHLVSLWLYDQMHWODLL]UDGD(ODERUDWDJHRWHKQLþNLKXVORYD]DL]UDGXSURMHNWD
za JUDÿHYL- nsku dozvolu ]D REMHNWH YHüH spratnosti.Rezultati ispitivanja su opredelili
LQYHVWLWRUD GD JUHMDQMH L KODÿHQMH REMHNWD EXGH SURMHNWRYDQR L] SULURGQRJ
izvora,geotermalnim sistemom.
Za navedHQLREMHNDWMHXUDÿHQ(ODERUDWgeotHKQLþNLh istraživanja terena za kat.parc.br.393/1

KO Lajko- YDFQDRVQRYX]DKWHYDSURMHNWDQWDSUHGX]HüDÄ'$678',2GRR/D]DUHYDF, u
skladu sa Zakonom o rudarstvu i geološkim istraživanjima („Sl.gl.RS br.101/2015,Zakonom
o plsnirsnju i izgradnji („Sl.gl.RS“br.145/14),i PravilQLNRP R WHKQLþNLP QRUPDWLYLPD ]D
WHPHOMHQMH JUDÿHYLQVNLK REMHNDWD Ä6OOLVW 6)5-³ EU . Istražne radove je izvelo PD
„3DãWULüDQDF³ d.o.o Valjevo, prema projektnom zadatku za VOHGHüi obim radove:
-kartiranje terena u zoni objekta,
-izrada 2 istražne bušotine,D=5-7m na okaciji objekta,
-detajno inženjersko-geooško kartiranje jezgra bušotine,
-X]LPDQMHX]RUDND]DODERUDWRULMVNDJHRPHKDQLþNDLVSLWLYDQMD
-L]YRÿHQMHVWDQGDUGQHSHQHWUDFLMHXVYDNRMEXãRWLQL
-merenje nivoa podzemnih voda u bušotini,
-izrada laboratorijskih analiza uzoraka tla,
-L]UDGD (ODERUDWD R JHRWHKQLþNLP XVORYLPD L]UDGH SURMHNWD ]D JUDÿHYLQVNX GR]YROXVD
datim neophodnim podacima o geološkom sastavu terena,inženjerskogeooškim i
hidrogeooškim osobinama terena, parametrima izdYRMHQLKOLWRORãNLKVORMHYDJHRVWDWLþNoj
analizi uslova fundiranja objekta GR]YROMHQR RSWHUHüHQMH L VOHJDQMH WODVD QHRSKRGQLP
JHRWHKQLþNLPSUHSRUXNDPDLXVlovima projektovanja i izgradnje objekata.
Teren je ravan i u morfološkom pogledu podoban za JUDGQMX2EMHNDWMHXRVQRYLüLULOLþQRJ

slova *G*.Temeljenje objekta je na dubinama fundiranja Df=3,70 i 5,20 m od planirane kote
QLYHODFLMH%UXWRSRYUãLQDWHPHOMQHSORþH-Bp osnove 528,50 m2.
Na okaciji objekta su izvedene 2 istražne bušotine,ukupne dubine 12,50 m,a paralelno i

terenska makrosko-pska identifikacija i klasifikacija tla. Za potrebe laboratorijskog
ispitivanja uzeto je 6 uzoraka. Laboratori- jskRP JHRPHKDQLþNRP DnDOL]RP XWUDÿHno je 6
opita RGUHÿLYDQMDJUDQXORPHWULMVNRJVDstava i prirodne vla-åQRVWLGRNVXRSLWLRGUHÿLYDQMD
]DSUHPLQVNHWHåLQHXSULURGQRYODåQRPLVXYRPVWDQMXXUDÿHQLQDX]RUND2SLWLRGUHÿLYDQMD
Aterbergovih granica konsistencije su vršeni na 3 uzorka.U lDERUDWRULML VX XUDÿHQD
edometarska opita otporno-deformabilnih svojstava i 1 drenirani opit direktnog smicanja. U
obe istražne bušotine izvedeni su opiti standardne penetracije,radi procene konsistencije
koherentnog tla, RGQRVQRRGUHÿLYDQMDSULURGQH]ELMHQRVWLLRWSRUQR-deformabilnih svojstava
izdvojenih QHNRKHUHQWQLKOLWRORãNLKþODQRYDL]YHGHQRMHRSLWDVWDQGDUGQHLRSLWGLQDPLþNH
penetracije.
115
,VWUDåQREXãHQMHMHL]YHGHQRUXþQRPVRQGDåQRPJDUQLWXURPSUHþQLND2LPPEH]
upotrebe vode.
8 WRNX LVWUDåQRJ EXãHQMD DSULO JRG XRþHQD MH SRG]Hmna voda,a nakon završetka
EXãHQMDLþHWLULGDQDNDVQLMHXWYUÿHQMHXVWDOMHQLQLYR vode.
3URUDþXQ GR]YROMHQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD WOD MH YUãHQ ]D minimanu dubinu fundiranja objekta
Df=3,70 m i parametrima sloja gline,sa dobijenim potrebnim podacima,radi dobijanja
YUHGQRVWLGR]YROMHQRJRSWHUHüHQMDWODTDN1P za Df=3,70 m.
3URUDþXQ VOHJDQMD MH UDÿHQ SURJUDPRP DXWRUD GU0LODQD 0DNVLPRYLüD Analiza sleganja
ukazuje GDVXPRJXüHSRMDYHQHUDYQRPHUQLKVOHJDQMDXVOHGUD]OLþLWHGXELQHIXQGLUanja,ali su
u granicama dozvoljenih. 5DþXQVND YUHGQRVW GR]YROMHQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD MH YHüD RG
SURMHNWRYDQHYUHGQRVWLRSWHUHüHQMDRGREMHNWDWDNRGDVHQHRþHNXMHSUHNRUDþHQMHGR]YROMHQH
vrednosti.
Sl 6DGDãQMDID]DL]JUDÿHQRVWLREMHNWD
Figire 8: Present stage of construction
Sl.9 i 10: OEH]EHÿHQMHVLOD]DXJDUDåHREMHNWD preko pasaža

Figure 9 i 10: Undergrund garage assess road
116
=$./-8ý$.
6DQNFLRQLVDQMHQHSUDYLOQRVWLXL]YRÿHQMXGXJRJRGLãQMDQHEULJDRREMHNWLPD]DKWHYDVWUXþQL
pristup problematici,prikupljanje podataka za projektovanje, UD]JUDQLþHQMH QDGležnosti i
pravilna primena zakonskih odredaba, što sve implicira donošenje Odluke,a samim tim sledi
planiranje finansijskih sredstava.
2GODJDQMH L]YRÿHQMD UDGRYDSRYHüDYD RELP SRVODVDPLP WLP SRYHüDQMH WURãNRYD, znatno

YHüLKQHJRGDVHEODJRYUHPHQRUHDJRYDOR,preventivno ili kada se RãWHüDQMHprimeti.
Poslovno-VWDPEHQLREMHNDWXL]JUDGQML]DNRMLVXXUDÿHQLJHRWHKQLþNLUH]XOWDWLLVSLWLYDQMDWOD
i date preporuke za projektovanje sX]QDþDMQLza projektanta objekta i za investitora gradnje.
Zemljani radovi VX L]YRÿHQL SUL QLåLP QLYRLPD SRG]HPQLK YRGDSUDüHQLP XJUDÿHQRP
pijezometarskom cevi.U toku iskopa pojavljivali su se površinski dotoci sa prostora ulica pri
padavinama, kao i plitke, procedne, podzemne vode,zadržane prilikom slabe ocedljivosti
ginovitog tla. Evakuacija vode je vršena obodnom drenažom i muljnim pumpama.Ukopani
deo objekta ]DãWLüHQ MH YRGRQHSURSXVQLP EHWRQRP L ÄERELþDVWRP³ SODVWLILFiranom
hidroizolacijom.
Teren kat.parc.broj 393/1 KO Lajkovac grade aluvijalni sedimenti predstavljeni glinama i

šljunkom. 2EMHNDW MH YHüLP GHORP fundiran u sloju gline,a deo u sloju zaglibljenog
šljunka,preko sloja tampona d=0,30 m.
U tektonskom pogledu konstatovano je da je da su strukturni odnosi tla jednostavni.
U morfološkom pogledu konstatovano je da se teren nalazi na zaravnjenom terasnom platou

QDMPODÿHUHþQHWHUDVHUHNH.ROXEDUH1DGPRUVNDYLVLQDWHUHQDNUHüHVHRNRP
LITERATURA
1. (ODERUDWRJHRWHKQLþNLPXVORYLPDL]UDGHSURMHNWD]DJUDÿHYLQVNXGR]YROXSRVORYQR-stambene
zgrade na kat.parc.br.393/1 KO Lajkovac,april 2019.god.
2. *HRWHKQLþNLDVSHNWLJUDÿHYLQDUVWDYD- Zbornik sa II Savetovanja,rad Miroljuba 6DPDUGDNRYLüD
2. Inspekcijsko postupanje na otklonu nepravilnosti na QD]QDþHQLPobjektima
117
6WUXþQLUDG
UDK 627.215.5(282.243.7)(497.11)
*(27(+1,ý.,86/29,,=*5$'1-(
0(Ĉ81$52'12*3871,ý.2*
PRISTANIŠTA ZEMUN, DESNA OBALA
DUNAVA KM 1173+140,00
6WHYDQûRUOXND6ODYLFD-DQNRYLü7DQMD+DIQHU/MXEHQRYLü
0LUROMXEäLYDQRYLü
Rudarski Institut Beograd, stevan.corluka@ribeograd.ac.rs
REZIME
Inte]LYLUDQMHP UHþQRJ VDREUDüDMD X SRVOHGQMH YUHPH XND]DOD VH SRWUHED GD VH REH]EHGL
DGHNYDWDQSULVWDQ]DPHÿXQDURGQHEURGRYH3RVWRMHüLSULVWDQ]DEURGRYHX=HPXQXMHVDPR
]D PDOD SORYLOD L L] LVWLK UD]ORJD 5XGDUVNRP LQVWLWXWX MH SRYHUHQR GD XUDGL RGJRYDMXüD
geološko-JHRWHKQLþND LVWDåLYDQMD L LVSLWLYDQMDNDNR EL VH SULNXSLOH SRGORJH QHRSKRGQH ]D
SURMHNWRYDQMHLL]JUDGQMXQRYRJPHÿXQDURGQRJSULVWDQLãWDX=HPXQXU radu su prikazani
rezultati ovih ispitivanja i istraživanja.
./-8ý1(5(ý,3ULVWDQLãWH]DEURGRYHLQåHQMHUVNRJHRORãNDLVWUDåLYDQMDJHRORãNDJUDÿD
šipovi
GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS FOR

CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL
PASSENGER DOCK ZEMUN, RIGHT SIDE OF THE
DANUBE KM 1173 + 140,00
ABSTRACT
The intensification of river traffic in recent times has shown the need to provide adequate
dock for international ships. The existing dock for ships in Zemun is for small vessels only
and for the same reasons the Mining Institute has been entrusted to do appropriate geological-
geotechnical explorations and tests in order to gather the bases necessary for the design and
construction of a new international dock in Zemun. The results of these tests and research are
presented in the paper.
KEY WORDS: Ship dock, geological engineering research, geological structure, piles
UVOD
3URMHNWRPMHSUHGYLÿHQDL]JUDGQMD mHÿXQDURGQRg SXWQLþNRg pristaništa u Zemunu, na desnoj

obali Dunava (km 1173+140,00) kod galerije i restorana Stara kapetanija. (Slika 1).
118
Slika 1. âLUHLVWUDåQRSRGUXþMH>VQLPDNSUHX]HWVDLQWHUQHWVWUDQLFH*RRJOH(DUWK@
Figure 1. Wider field of investigation [image taken from Google Earth, 10/09/2018]
U cilju sagledavanja geoloãNLKLJHRPHKDQLþNLKNDUDNWHULVWLNDL]YUãHQDMHanaliza i sinteza

svih dosadašnjih geotehniþkih ispitivanja, kao i rezultata izvedenih istraživanja za potrebe
izgradnje meÿunarodnog putniþkog pristaništa u Zemunu.
U ovom radu prikazani su rezultati istraživanja sa predlogom geotehniþkih uslova izgradnje

pristaništa.
PRIKAZ IZVEDENIH ISTRAŽNIH RADOVA
Na predmetnoj lokaciji, izvedene su dve istražne bušotine (dubine do 22 m), izvršeno je

inženjerskogeološko kartiranje jezgra i laboratorijska ispitivanja fiziþko-mehaniþkih
karakteristika stena i tla.
Istražno bušenje izvedeno je u koritu reke Dunav sa pontona (slika 2).

119
Slika 2. Garnitura za bušenje

Figure 2. Drilling equipment
PRIKAZ REZULTATA ISTRAŽIVANJA
8PRUIRORãNRPSRJOHGXLVWUDåQRSRGUXþMHSULSDGDUHþQRPNRULWX'XQDYD(slika 3), dok se

priobalni teren nalazi u aluvijalnoj ravani Dunava. U ]DOHÿXse nalazi zemunski lesni odsek.
Kote terena su 72-75m, dok su u zoni istraživanja kote korita Dunava od 67,50 do 68,20m, a
u trenutku istraživanja nivo Dunava, bio je na koti 70,20m.
$QWURSRJHQLþLQLRFLXWLFDOLVXQDL]PHQXPLNURUHOMHIDNDRLQDGUXJDPRUIRORãNDVYRMVWYD
3UHVYHJDQDSURPHQXUHOMHIDQDUHþQLPREDODPDþLPHMHVSUHþHQDIOXYLMDOQDHUR]LMDGHVQH
obale Dunava
120
Slika 32EDORXWYUGDNRGEXGXüHJSULVWDQLãWD
Figure 3. Look on right bank of the Danube
*HRORãNXJUDÿXterena na lokaciji pristaništa þLQH: najstarije stenske mase plave laporovite

gline (M 3 2) na kotama 30-40m.n.v. Kvartar je predstavljen paleocensko holocenskim
naslagama od kojih su najstarije aluvijalno jezerske tvorevine (aj), preko kojih se nalazi
aluvion Dunava
U inženjerskogeološkom smislu izdvojeni su (Slika 4):
Nasuti tehnogeni materijal (nt) debljine je 1,00m SRVWDYOMHQQDREDODPDUDGLVSUHþDYDQMD

erozije reke Dunav.
Mulj (am), zastupljen od površine ili ispod nasipa u debljini do 2.0m. To je sadašnji nanos,
QHYH]DQåLWNRJNRQVLVWHQWQRJVWDQMDEH]þYUVWRüHLL]X]HWQRGHIRUPDELODQ7DPQRVLYHGR
crne boje.
Paket aluvijalno-jezerskih naslaga (aj 2 k) se sastoji iz više slojeva peskova, glinovitih i

ãOMXQNRYLWLKSHVNRYD1DMYHüLPGHORPVXL]JUDÿHQLRGVLWQR]UQLKSUDãLQDVWLKSHVNRYDåXWH
do žuto-crvenkaste boje. Ovi peskovi su srednjezrni do sitnozrni, rastresiti, i ravnomerno
granulirani. U proslojcima se javljaju zaglinjene prašLQH L SUDãLQDVWH JOLQH åXüNDVWR
121
crvenkaste boje. .DR]QDþDMDQLSUHGRPLQDWQDWDQVORMXRNYLUXRYRJNRPSOHNVDSRMDYOMXMXVH

OHWQHSHãþDUD koje dosadašQMLPLVWUDåLYDQMLPDQLVXXWYUÿHQH.
Slika 4. Inženjerskogeološki presek terena 1-1'

Figure 4. Engineering-geological cross-section of the terrain 1-1'
/HWQHSHãþDUDDMOSã MDYOMDMXVHNDRSURVORMFLLVRþLYDXQXWDUãOMXQNRYLWRSHVNRYLWLKQDVODJD

Na ispitivanom terenu javlja se više tanjih slojeva debljine do 10cm i jedan dominatan
proslojak debljine 1,0 m. Po sastavu su prašinasti peskovi sa karbonatnim vezivom. Boje su
svetlo sive do bele. 2GOLNXMXVHSRYHüDQLPRWSRUQLPLGHIRUPDELOQLPVYRjstvima (slika 5.).
Slika 5/HWQDSHãþDUD
Figure 5. Lens sandstone
122
Sloj jezerskih glina (G) prostire se ispod aluvijalno-jezerskih sedimenata, koje su dobro
NRQVROLGRYDQHSRYHüDQLKRWSRUQLKi deformacionih svojstava.
Peskovi, prašinasti, sitnozrni, srednjezrni i šljunkoviti (P). äXWRVPHÿHERMH XþLMLVDVWDY

ulaze finozrni, krupnozni peskRYL UHÿH ãOMXQNRYL 3R VDVWDYX VX ]DJOLQMHQL þHVWR VD
proslojcima krupnozrnog peska i šljunka. Rasprostiranje ove sredine je nepravilno u
horizontalnom i vertikalnom pravcu. Srednje do jako stišljivi, sa dubinom opada
NRKHUHQWQRVWDUDVWHXþHãüD peskovite frakcije. Lako se buši i slabo je konsolidovan
*(27(+1,ý.,86/29,,=*5$'1-(35,67$1,â7$
Planirano je da se pristan za brodovHIXQGLUDQDEXãHQLPãLSRYLPDSUHþQLNa ࢥ = 800mm,

dužine L = 16.00m (baza šipa - ɤɨɬɚPnJm).
Dozvoljena nosivost šipova uradjena je pRPRüXVRIWYHUVNRJSDNHWD*(26 na osnovu:
Metode (Jean-Louis Briaud: Geotechnical Engineering: Unsaturated and Saturated Soils,

Wiley, 2013) i modela terena slika 6.
Slika 6. Model terena

Figure 6. Terrain model
123
ɌDEHOD5H]XOWDWLSURUDþXQDGR]YROMHQHQRVLYRVWLãLSDSUHþQLND݊=800mm
Table 1. The calculation results permissible carrying capacity of the pile diameter ݊ = 800mm
Nosivost Nosivost Ukupna dozvoljena
Dužina šipa Baza šipa u
baze šipa RPRWDþDãLSD nosivost šipa
(m) sloju
(kN) (kN) (kN)
16,00 aj 2 k 1181.47 3884.55 2025
ɌDEHOD2þHNLYDQHYUHGQRVWLNRQVROLGDFLRQRJVOHJDQMDãLSDSUHþQLND݊=800mm
Table 2. The expected value of the consolidation settlement of the pile diameter ݊ = 800mm
Sila u šipu
Dužina šipa (m) Sleganje Sc (mm)
(kN)
0.00 0.0
816.00 10.4
16,00 1176.35 15.8
1200.37 16.2
1594.30 23.0
=$./-8ý$.
Predmetni prostor QD NRPH MH SUHGYLÿHQD L]JUDGQMD PHÿXQDURGQRJ SULVWDQLãWD nalazi se u
Zemunu, na desnoj obali Dunava.
Teren predstavlja aluvijalnu ravan Dunava, u rasponu apsolutnih kota od ~ 72-64 mnv.
=D SRWUHEH GHILQLVDQMD XVORYD L]JUDGQMH XUDÿHQD VX: terenska istraživanja i ispitivanja i
laborDWRULMVNDJHRPHKDQLþNDLVSLWLYDQMD
Rezultati istraživanja i ispitivanja pokazali su da je teren složenog geološkog sastava. Ova

složena geološka slika uslovila je duboko fundiranje, sa bazom šipa u sloju aluvijalno-
jezerskih sedimenata.
=DSURMHNWRYDQXGXåLQXLSUHþQLNãLSDVUDþXQDWHYUHGQRVWLGR]YROMHQHQRVLYRVWLLVOHJDQMD
zadovoljavaju zahtevane kriterijume za fundiranje pristaništa za brodove.
124
Slika 7. Izvedeni bušeni šipovi na zemunskom pristaništu, [snimak od 18/10/2019, S.Jankoviü]

Figure 7. 'ULOOHGSLOHVDW=HPXQGRFN>VQDSVKRWIURP6-DQNRYLü@
Usvojene su preporuke opisane u ovom radu za izgradnju SULVWDQLãWD3UHSRþHWNDL]JUDGQMH

XUDÿHQD VX LVSLWLYDQMD ãLSRYD QD WHVW VWDWLþNRJ YHUWLNDOQRJ L KRUL]RQWDOQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD
GLQDPLþNL WHVW VD YHOLNLP QDSUH]DQMHP L LVSLWLYDQMH LQWHJULWHWD. Na slici 7 prikazani su
izvedeni šipovi u zemunskom pristaništu za PHÿXQDURGQLEURGVNLVDREUDüDM
LITERATURA:
2VQRYQDJHRORãNDNDUWDLWXPDþ]DOLVW%HRJUDGGeološki zavod - „Srbije“, Beograd, 1994.

Osnovna inženjerskogeološka karta za list Beograd, 1:100000, Geološki zavod Srbije, Beograd, 2012.
0HQNRYLü/M.RãüDO00LMDWRYLü0.QHåHYLü0*HRPRUIRORãNDNDUWD6UELMH
Beograd, 2005.
*HRWHKQLþNa istraživanja desne obale Dunava od restorana „Šaran“ do hotela „Jugoslavija '',
Kosovoprojekt, Beograd, 1979.
*HRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDWHUHQDVGHVQHREDOH'XQDYDRGNPGR.RVRYRSURMHNW
Beograd, 1981.
Rekonstrukcija ispusta opšte kanaOL]DFLMHX'XQDYQDVHNWRUXL]PHÿXUHVWRUDQDÄâDUDQ³LÄ9HQHFLMD³
u Zemunu, Geotest, Beograd, 2011.
125
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.3
3/$1,5$1-(,,=92Ĉ(1-(32'=(01,+
OBJEKATA U SLOŽENIM GEOLOŠKIM
SREDINAMA
0LORã9XþLQLü*, 0LOXWLQ9XþLQLü**
* ,QVWLWXW]DJUDÿHYLQDUVWYR, 6LPD%DURYLüD-18, Podgorica,

milos.vucinic17@gmail.com
***33ODQXP%HRJUDG'6'3RGJRULFD9HOMND9ODKRYLüD
filijala-podgorica@planum.rs
REZIME
*HRWHKQLþNLXVORYLL]JUDGQMHREMHNDWDSUHGVWDYOMDMXYDåDQGLRSODQLUDQMDSURMHNWRYDQMDL
izgradnje objekata. Stoga su zDSUDYLOQRSODQLUDQMHLL]YRÿHQMHJUDÿHYLQVLKREMHNDWDSRWUHEQL
podaci R PRUIRORJLML JHRORãNRM JUDÿL KLGURJHRORãNLP VYRMVWYLPD VHL]PLþQRVWL WHUHQD
savremenim geološkim procesima i pojavama kao i o inženjerskogeološkim svojstvima
izdvojenih sredina. To ELWQRXWLþHXRGOXþLYDQMXRJUDÿHQMXLQDþLQXL]YRÿHQMDUDGRYD=DWR
se u radu, kroz neke primjere izvedenih podzemnih objekata, SULND]XMXL]GYRMHQHJHRWHKQLþNH
]RQH VD RVQRYQLP NDUDNWHULVWLNDPD PHWRGRORJLMD L]ERUD þYUVWRüH VWLMHQVNLK PDVD NDR L
VSHFLILþQL JHRWHKQLþNL XVORYL na koje se nailazilo i nailazi X WRNX JUDÿHQMD SRG]HPQLK
objekata.
./-8ý1(5,-(ý, Stabilnost stijena, klasifikacija RMR i Q - sistema, rasjedna zona
PLANNING AND PERFORMANCE OF

UNDERGROUND OBJECTS IN COMPLEX
GEOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTS
ABSTRACT
Geotechnical conditions for construction of structures represent an important part of the
planning, design and construction of facilities. Therefore, the proper planning and execution
of building structures requires information on the morphology, geological structure,
hydrogeological properties, seismicity of the terrain, modern geological processes and
phenomena, as well as on the engineering-geological properties of the separated
environments. This has a significant influence in deciding on the construction and how the
works are performed. Therefore, the paper, through some examples of underground
structures, presents separate geotechnical zones with basic characteristics, methodology for
selecting rock mass strength, as well as specific geotechnical conditions encountered and
encountered during the construction of underground structures.
KEYWORDS: Rock stability, classification of RMR and Q - systems, fault zone

126
UVOD
3R]QDWD MH þLQMHQLFD GD MH ]D SURMHNWRYDQMH REMHNDWD SRWUHEQR SRVWHSHQR RGOXþLYDQMH X]
XþHãüH EURMQLK þLQLODFD HNRQRPVNH WHKQLþNH VRFLMDOQH L GU SULURGH 3RVHEQR NDGD MH X
pitanju planiranje podzemnih objekata i radova, koje prate složeni postupci projektovanja,
JGMHMHXQDMYHüHPGLMHOXQDMELWQLMHSR]QDYDQMHLQåHQMHUVNRJHRORãNLKVYRMVWDYDWHUHQDMHUX
]QDþDMQRMPMHULXWLþXQDL]YRÿHQMHLFLMHQXNRãWDQMDSODQLUDQRJREMHNWD6SUDYRPVHPRåH
UHüLGDRYDGYDþLQLRFDRGUHÿXMXGHILQLWLYQXRGOXNXRSURMHNWRYDQMXLJUDÿHQMXSRG]HPQLK
REMHNDWD6WRJDJHRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDLLVSLWLYDQMDNDRLRVPDWUDQMDSUHGVWDYOMDMXYHRPD
]QDþDMDQGiRSODQLUDQMDSURMHNWRYDQMDJUDÿHQMDLRGUåDYDQMDREMHNWD3RUHGQDVWRMDQMDGD
JUDÿHQMHEXGHHILNDVQRNYDOLWHWQRLHNRQRPLþQRNRGRYHYUVWHUDGRYDVHQDPHüXGRGDWQH
potrebe – GDVHSULOLNRPLVNRSDYDQMDQHUHPHWLJHRVWDWLþNDUDYQRWHåDLQHSRNUHQHVWLMHQVND
masa iz okruženja prema iskopu, da se ne prave preklopi i ne narušava struktura samonikle
stijene koja ostaje van konture iskopa, da se radovi obavljaju u bezbjednim, higijenski
GR]YROMHQLP XVORYLPD .RYDþHYLü 7RNRP QMLKRYRJ L]YRÿHQMD PRJXüD VX
odronjavanja, posebno u tektonski narušenim zonama i rasjedima, gdje je u takvim
VOXþDMHYLPDWHãNRL]EMHüLGDQHGRÿHGRL]YMHVQLKSRUHPHüDMDLGHIRUPDFLMD,]WRJUDzloga se
XWDNYLPVOXþDMHYLPDUDGRYLL]YRGHX]RGJRYDUDMXüLGRGDWQLRSUH]LSULPMHQXQHRSKRGQLK
mjera zaštite. 5DGRYHXSRG]HPOMXSUDWHPQRJLSUREOHPLDOLVHXYLMHNQDÿHQDþLQ]DQMLKRYR
prevazilaženje. Naravno da sve to SRVNXSOMXMHJUDGQMXDSRVHEQRDNRMHSRWUHEQRRMDþDYDQMH
brdskog materijala.
Za narasle potrebe sve brojnijeg ljudskog roda, pored infrastrukturnih objekata za civilne
potrebe, danas se u svijetu sve više grade podzemni objekti za vojne potrebe. Tu se prije
svega misli na podzemna skloništa od armiranog betona – kaponire - na aerodromima,
podzemne aerodrome, specijalne zaštitne objekte podzemnog tipa za potrebe ratnog
vazduhoplovstva i dr. Posebni zahtjevi pri izgradnji takvih – specijalnih podzemnih objekata
odnose se na elemente ]DãWLWHRGHIHNDWDXGDUQLKWDODVDL]D]YDQLKNODVLþQLPLQXNOHDUQLP
napadnim sredstvima. Za potrebHL]YRÿHQMDRYHYUVWHUDGRYDSRWUHEQRMH]QDQMHLVNXVWYR
PHKDQRLVWUXþQDRVSRVREOMHQRVWL]YRÿDþDUDGRYDþLMXUDGQXVQDJXNDUDNWHULãXLQLFLMDWLYD
smjelost, savjesnostXSRUQRVWRGOXþQRVWLVLJXUQRVWXVHEHLPXGURVWNRMDQDODåHRSUH]QRVW,
jer je iznad svega, pored ostalog, bitna EH]EMHGQRVWXþHVQLNDXL]YRÿHQMXRYDNRNRPSOHNVQLK
radova. Shodno civilnim i vojnim potrebama, istovremeno se usavršavaju sredstva za rad,
XQDSUHÿXMHWHKQRORJLMDUDGDSREROMãDYDMXVHSRVWRMHüHLXYRGHQRYHSULNODGQHPHWRde rada,
SULODJRÿHQH VSHFLILþQLP XVORYLPD Takve radove u podzemlju prate razQH VSHFLILþQH
RNROQRVWLPHÿXNRMLPDVX
- WLMHVDQUDGQLSURVWRURJUDQLþDYDMXüL]DPHKDQL]RYDQLUDG
- terenski uslovi lokacije objekta, PRUIRORJLMD SHWURJUDIVNH JHRORãNH L JHRPHKDQLþNH
NDUDNWHULVWLNHLKLGURORãNLXVORYLNRMLSRMHGLQDþQRLOL]DMHGQRPRJXL]D]YDWLSUREOHPHXWRNX
L]YRÿHQMDUDGRYD. Promjene u materijalima nakon iskopa podzemnog prostora, pojava vode,
pojava štetnih gasovaSRMDYDWRSORWHSULJUDÿHQMXXYLOLNLPGXELQDPD
- stalna opasnost od iznenadnog urušavanja stijenske mase,
- QHþLVWYD]GXK, nastao disanjem ljudi, radom mehanizacije i usljed miniranja,
- QHSRDWRMDQMHGQHYQHVYMHWORVWLLUDGSULYMHãWDþNRPosvjetljenju,
- VPHWQMHLSRWHãNRüHSULL]YRÿHQMXJHRGHWVNLKUDGRYDNRGQHSUHNLGQRJUDGD
- neprekidnost radova u nastojanju da se objekat što prije pusti u rad.
127
=DVYHSRPHQXWRãWRVHRþHNXMHXWRNXJUDÿHQMDu podzemlju, SRWUHEQDVXRSVHåQRXUDÿHQD

detaljna prethodna inženjesko-geloška istraživanja i ispitivanja. 2EMHNWLYQD L HNRQRPLþQD
NRQVWUXNWLYQD ]DãWLWD PRJXüD MH VDPR QDNRQ izvršenih iskopa i prikupljenih podataka, jer
prethodna geološko-JHRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDsluže samo kao okvir ]DSUHGYLÿDQMHSRWUHEQLK
NRQVWUXNWLYQLK UMHãHQMD ]D RVLJXUDQMH LVNRSD X RþHNLYDQLP XVORYLPD Takva rješenja trpe
L]PMHQHGRSXQHPRGLILNDFLMXLOLPLMHQMDQMHQDOLFXPMHVWDQDNRQãWRMHLVNRSXUDÿHQLOLMHX
toku. =ERJ VSHFLILþQRVWL RYDNYLh radova, za potrebe planiranja i izgradnje podzemnih
objekata potrebno je poznavanje inženjersko-geoloških uslova.
INŽENJERSKO GEOLOŠKI USLOVI
.RPSOHNVQRVW SUREOHPDWLNH SURMHNWRYDQMD L JUDÿHQMD podzemnih konstrukcija je rezultat

simultanog GHMVWYDQL]DIDNWRUDNRMLVHWLþXVDPHSULURGHNDUDNWHULVWLNDREMHNDWDLQMLKRYRJ
okruženja, kao i kriterijuma za optimalno projektovanje i sigurnost objekata. U složenom
SRVWXSNDSURMHNWRYDQMDLJUDÿHQMDSRG]HPQLKREMHNDWD XQDMYHüHPobimu dolazi do izražaja
potreba za poznavanjem inženjersko-geoloških uslova. U cilju pravilnog definisanja
tehnologije rada L]DãWLWHLVNRSDSRWUHEQRMHGDQDRGUHÿHQLQDþLQEXGHGHILQLVDQDVWDELOQRVW
stjenovite mase u toku iskopa, stabilnost pojedinih velikih blokova, otpor pri kopanju,
miniranje i bušenje, uslovi za zaštitu od podzemnih voda, uslovi za zaštitu od visokih
temperatura i gasova, uslovi za XWRYDU L WUDQVSRUW PHÿXVREQR GHMVWYR VWMHQRYLWH PDVH L
XJUDÿHQLKLOLVNODGLãWHQLKPDWHULMDODXWLFDMUDGQLKRSHUDFLMDQDprirodnu sredinu u fazi iskopa
i dr.
Za uspješno projektovanje potrrebno je da se izvrši podjela terena u kvazihomogene zone,
JGMHVHRþHNXMXVOLþQLXVORYL]Dgradnju objekata (Jovanovski i dr. 2012). Na slci 1 prikazan
je primjer izdvojenih kvazihomogenih zona.
3RGMHODQD]RQHVHYUãLQDRVQRYXGHILQLVDQHOLWLRORãNHJUDÿHWHUHQDWHNWRQVNLKVYRMVWDYD
YLVLQHQDGVORMDL]QDGLVNRSDLVSXFDORVWLLþYUVWRüHVWLMHQHLVO2ELþQRVH]DVYDNXL]GYRMHQX
zonu dodaju RGJRYDUDMXüH YULMHGQRVWL ]D kvalitet stijene, vrši se izbor tehnologije iskopa,
definiše se primarna i završna ograda, definišu se posebne mjere za zaštitu u toku rada, i svi
RVWDOL]QDþDMQLDVSHNWL]DVLJXUQRVWL]YRÿHQMDREMHNWD
8 SRþHWQRM ID]L SURMHNWRYDQMD RG YHOLNH SRPRüL VX NODVLILNDFLRQH PHWRGH EXGXüL GD VH
njihovom primjenom može prognozirati veliki broj potrebnih parametara. Primjera radi, za
procjenu dimenzija stabilnih otvora može da se iskoristi Q – sistem, slika 2.
Na slici 3, prikazan je dijagram, gdje se paralelno vrši procjena vremena stabilnosti
SRG]HPQLKRWYRUDNRULãüHQMHPNODVLILNDFLRQLKPHWRGD%LHQMDYVNRJL%DUWRQD
Klasifikacione metode su korisne i pri procjeni elemenata podgradnog sistema, slika 4, 5 i 6 i tabela 1.
128
Slika 1. Primjer: L]GYRMHQHNYD]LKRPRJHQH]RQH$GRĈ]DWXQHOna autoputu E75 od Demir

.DSLMHGRĈHYÿHOLMH-RYDQRYVNLLGU
)LJXUH([DPSOHLVRODWHGTXDVLKRPRJHQHRXV]RQHV$GRĈIRUWXQQHORQWKH
E75 highway from 'HPLU.DSLMDWR*HYÿHOLMD-RYDQRYVNLHWDO
6OLND'LMDJUDPSURJQR]HGLPHQ]LMDVWDELOQRJQHSRGJUDÿHQRJLVNRSD]DUD]QHVOXþDMHYHL]SUDNVH
(Jovanovski i dr. 2012)
Figure 2. Dimension forecast diagram of stable unsupported excavation for various practice cases
(Jovanovski et al. 2012)
129
Slika 3. Dijagram procjene vremena stabilnosti QHSRGJUDÿHQRJUDVSRQDNRG

podzemnog iskopa, deformacije i pritisak na podgradu
Figure 3. Underground span stability estimation time diagram for underground
excavation, deformation and subgrade
g ppressure
Slika 4. Prognoza debljine prskanog betona kod raspona u podzemju u zavisnosti od kvaliteta prema
Bartonu i dr.
Figure 4. Prognosis of thickness of sprayed concrete at span depending on quality according to Barton
et al.
130
Slika 5. Sintezni (jedinstveni) dijagram za procjenu tipa podgrade u zavisnosti od kvaliteta stijenske
mase prema Q - sistemu
Figure 5. Synthetic (unique) diagram for estimation of subgrade type depending on quality of rock
mass according to Q- sistem
6OLND'LMDJUDPSURFMHQHUDVWRMDQMDL]PHÿXDQNHUDGHEOMLQDSUVNDQRJEHWRQDLUDVWRMDQMDPHÿX
þHOLþQLPOXNRYLPDX]DYLVQRVWLRGNYDOLWHWDVWLMHQVNHPDVH
Figure 6. Diagram of estimation of distance between anchors, thickness of sprayed concrete and
distance between steel arches depending on the quality of rock mass
131
2þLJOHGQR MH GD NODVLILNDFLRQH PHWRGH RPRJXüDYDMX UMHãDYDQMH YHOLNRJ EURMD SUDNWLþQLK
problemDDOLQHQXGHUMHãHQMH]DRGUHÿHQHVSHFLMDOQHVOXþDMHYHNDRãWRVX stabilnost velikih
LQGLYLGXDOQLKEORNRYDPRJXüQRVWLSRMDYHJRUVNRJXGDUDUMHãDYDQMHSUREOHPD]GUREOMHQLK
poroznih stijenskih masa sklonih bubrenju, slika 7.
.
6OLND6SHFLILþQLVOXþajevi podzemnih iskopa: I – pojava potencijalno nestabilnih blokova
formiranih od pukotinskih sistema u svodu i stranama iskopa; II – aktivni rasjed u blizini iskopa koji
PRåHELWLX]URNVWUDQLþQRJREUXãDYDQMDLVNRSDXþYUVWRMVWLMHQLQDYHOLNLPGXELQDPDi pojave gorskog
udara.; III – presjek iskopa tunela zdrobljene rasjedne zone ili zone sklonoj bubrenju (strelice i
šrafirana zona XND]XMXQDSUDYFHPRJXüLKSRPMHUDQMD
Figure 7. Specific cases of underground excavations: I - occurrence of potentially unstable blocks
formed by crack systems in the vault and sides of the excavation; II - active fault near the excavation,
which may be the cause of lateral collapse of the excavation in solid rock at great depths, and the
occurrence of a mountain impact .; III - Excavation section of the tunnel of the crushed fault zone or
swelling prone zone (arrows and screwed area indicate directions of possible displacements)
.DGDMHPRJXüDSRMDYDRGUHÿHQLKQHVWDELOQLKEORNRYDRGSRVHEQHYDåQRVWLMHGHILQLVDQMH
NLQHPDWLþNLK XVORYD ORPD ãWR SRGUD]XPLMHYD DQDOL]X RULMHQWDFLMH LVNRSD u odnosu na
elemente pada pukotina, slika 8 i slika 9.
Slika 8. Potencijalno nestabilni blokoviformirani od tri glavna pukotinska sistema za iskop dovodnih
tunela brane “Sveta Petka” na rijeci Treski (prikaz steregrafske projekcije)
Figure 8. Potentially unstable blocksformed by the three main fissure systems for the excavation of
the feeder tunnels of the “Sveta Petka” dam on the River Treska (view of the stereographic
projection)
132
Tabela 1. Predlog podgrade u zavisnosti od klase stijenske mase prema Bienjavskom

Table 1. Subgrade proposal depending on the rock mass class according to Bienjavsk
Klasa stijenske Iskop Sidra Prskani ýHOLþQLOXNRYL
mase beton
I-Veoma Cijeli otvor, Nije potrebna nikakva podgrada osim lokalnog
dobra stijena Napredovanje po SRMHGLQDþQRJVLGUHQMD
RMR=81-100 3m
II-Dobra Cijeli otvor, 1- Lokalno 50mm u Nije potrebno
stijena 1.5m sidrenje u svodu gdje je
RMR=61-80 napredovanje, svodu od 3m potrebno
cjelosna podgrada na rastojanju
QDPRGþHOD 2.5m
iskopa povremeno i sa
mrežom
III-Povoljna Izbijanje svoda, Sistematsko 50-100mm u Nije potrebno
stijena 1.5-3m sidrenje 4m svodu i
RMR=41-60 napredovanje, u dužine na 30mm sa
svodu privremena rastojanju od strana
podgrada 1.5-2m u svodu
paralelna sa i zidovima sa
iskopom, þHOLþQRP
kompletna mrežom u
podgrada 10m od svodu
þHODLVNRSD
IV-Slaba Izbijanje svoda po Sistematsko 100-150mm Laki do srednje
stijena 1-1.5m sidrenje 4-5m u svodu i teški na
RMR=21-40 XJUDÿLYDQMH dužine na 100mm na rastojanju od
kompletne rastojanju 1- stranama 1m gdje je
podgrade pralelno 1.5m u sovud i potrebno
iskopu 10m od zidovima sa
þHOD þHOLþQRP
mrežom
V-Veoma Iskop u fazama sa Sistematsko 150-200m u Srednje teški do
slaba stijena napredovanjem od sidrenje 5-6m’ svodu, WHãNLþHOLþQL
RMR<20 0.5-1.5m i na rastojanju 150mm na lukovi na
instaliranje od 1-1.5m u stranama i rastojanju od
podgrade svodu i 50mm na 0.75m
paralelno iskopu, zidovima sa þHOX
torkretiranje što je mrežom.
PRJXüHEUåH Sidrenje i
nakon miniranja podnog svoda
133
Slika 9. Potencijalno nestabilni blokovi u svodu i boku iskopa (FS – factor sigurnosti, W – težina
bloka)
Figure 9. Potentially unstable blocks in the vault and side of the excavation (FS - safety factor, W -
block weight)
U današnje vrijeme, za analizu ovakvih problema, postoje razna softverska rješenja, gdje se
direktno unose podaci elemenata pada pukotina, orijentacije iskopa, otpornosti na smicanje,
parametara za zaštitu iskopa primjenom sistematskog ili nesistematskog sidrenja, prskanog
betona i sl. Kao izlaz iz analize se dobija faktor sigurnosti potencijalno nestabilnih blokova,
slika 10.
6OLND1DþLQRVLJXUDQMDbloka u svodu iskopa tunela kod hidrojalovišta za rudnik “Sasa”-

Makedonska Kamenica, sa nesistematskim sidrenjem
Figure 10. Method of securing a block in the tunnel excavation vault at a hydroelectric mine for the
“Sasa” mine - Macedonian Kamenica, with non-systematic anchoring
2ELþQRSULL]YRÿHQMXSRG]HPQLKREMHNDWDQDMYHüLSUREOHPVHMDYOMDX]RQLXOD]QLKLL]OD]QLK
SRUWDOQLK GMHORYD ]ERJ VSHFLILþQLK SULOD]QLKXVORYD PDORJ QDGVORMD VNORQRJREUXãDYDQMX
pojava raspadnutog materijala u površinskim djelovima i sl.
U zavisnosti od stanja stjenovite mase i tehnologije iskopa, zavisi i zapremina iskopa. Za
prognozu cijene koštanja LVNRSDNRGSRG]HPQLKUDGRYDRELþQRVHSUL]QDMHW]YGR]YROMHQL
iskop, koji je u funkciji kvaliteta stijene slika 11.
134
.
6OLND'LMDJUDPSURFMHQHPRJXüHJLVNRSDX]DYLVQRVWLRGNYDOLWHWDVWLMHQH
Figure 11. Estimation diagram of possible excavation depending on rock quality
6GUXJHVWUDQH]ERJSULPMHQHQHDGHNYDWQRJQDþLQDPLQLUDQMDneblagovremenog postavljanja
primarne podgrade kod stijena koje su sklone bubrenju i drugih neadekvatnih tehnologija
iskopa, dešava se pojava nedozvoljenog iskopaSDLGRQDMGUDVWLþQLMHJSULPMHUDFMHORNXSQRJ
zatvaranja iskopanog otvora.
Pravovremeno postDYOMHQD SULPDUQD SRGJUDGD SULPMHQD RGJRYDUDMXüH WHKQRORJLMH L
meanizacije pri radu na iskopu, NOMXþQL su IDNWRUL VLJXUQRJ L HNRQRPLþQRJ L]YRÿHQMD
podzemnih radova. Posebno kod tunela dužih od 4 km, uvijek kada to dozvoljavaju geološki
L JHRWHKQLþNL XVORYL, WUHED SODQLUDWL RGJRYDUDMXüH PDãLQH ]D LVNRS WXQHOD Njihovom
SULPMHQRPVHGRELMDJODWNDSRYUãLQDSURNRSDLRPRJXüHQRMHEU]RQDSUHGRYDQMHLSDUDOHQR
postavljenje podgrade. Ali za njihovu primjenu je potrebno dobro poznavanje geoloških
uslova terenaVFLOMHPGDQHGRÿHGRQMHQRJ]DJODYOMYDQMD
U0-(672=$./-8ý.$
=ERJVSHFLILþQRVWLUDGRYa, za potrebe planiranja i izgradnje podzemnih objekata potrebno je

GREUR SR]QDYDQMH PRJXüQRVWL NRMHSUXåD QDXND R LQåHQMHUVNR-geološkim istraživanjima u
VSUH]L VD HNVSHULPHQWLPD X ODERUDWRULML L QD WHUHQX X] SDåOMLYR SRVPDWUDQMH L SURXþDYDQMH
prirode.
LITERATURA
.RYDþHYLü-6DYUHPHQRJUDÿHQMHXSRG]HPOMX$*0NQMLJD%HRJUDG
ȳɨɜɚɧɨɜɫɤɢɆȽɚɩɤɨɜɫɤɢɇɉɟɲɟɜɫɤɢɂȺɛɨɥɦɚɫɨɜȻɂɧɠɟɧɟɪɫɤɚɝɟɨɥɨɝɢʁɚȽɪɚɞɟɠɟɧ
ɮɚɤɭɥɬɟɬɋɤɨɩʁɟ
Barton, N., lien, R., Lunde, J., 1974. Engieneering classification of rock masses for the design of
tunnelsupport. Rock Mech, 6, 189-236.
Bieniawski, Z. T., 1989. Engieneering Rock Mass Classifications. John Wiley & Sons, New York
Hoek, E., Brown, T., 1997. Practical estimates of rosk massstrength. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 34
(8), 1165-1186.
Materijali – IZIIS, Skoplje
135
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.3(497.113)
SOME CHARACTERISTIC EXAMPLES OF

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND
CONSTRUCTING IN THE AREA OF NOVI SAD
Milinko VasLüMitar ĈRJR
Faculty of Technical Sciences, Novi Sad
ABSTRACT
The municipal area of Novi Sad is situated on a flat area along the Danube River and partly
on the northern slopes of the Fruška Gora Mountain. The complex geological structure of the
area has caused various geomechanical problems, which have their specific features in both
the flat and the sloping areas. Silt sediments and high groundwater levels are specific for the
flat terrains. The slopes, especially in the area on the right side of the Danube valley, contain
a number of big landslides. The paper lists the specific geotechnical problems related to
bridges, multi-storey structures, landslide remediation, tunnels, etc.
KEY WORDS: geotechnical investigation, loess, landslide, alluvial sediments
(.,.$5$.7(5,67,ý1,35,0(5,
*(27(+1,ý.,+,63,7,9$1-$,*5$Ĉ(1-$8
32'58ý-81292*6$'$
REZIME
*UDGVNRSRGUXþMH1RYRJ6DGDVHQDOD]LQD]DUDYQMHQRPGHOXX]'XQDYDMHGQLPGHORPLQD
VHYHUQLPSDGLQDPD)UXãNH*RUH6ORåHQDJHRORãNDJUDÿDMHXVORYLODLUD]QRYUVQHJHRWHKQLþNH
SUREOHPH NRML LPDMX VYRMH VSHFLILþQRVWL LX ]DUDYQMHQRP L QD SDGLQVNRm delu. Zaravnjeni
WHUHQL VX VSHFLILþQL SR ]DVWXSOMHQRVWL PXOMHYLWLK VHGLPHQDWD LYLVRNLP QLYRLPD SRG]HPQLK
YRGD 3DGLQVNL WHUHQL QDURþLWR X SRGUXþMX GHVQH GROLQVNH VWUDQH 'XQDYD VX VD EURMQLP
YHOLNLPNOL]LãWLPD8UDGXVXQDYHGHQLVSHFLILþQLSUREOHPLNRji su u vezi sa geotehnikom a
odnose se na mostove, višespratne objekte, sanaciju klizišta, tunele i dr.
./-8ý1(5(ý,: JHRWHKQLþNDLVSLWLYDQMD, les, klizišta, aluvijalni sedimenti
INTRODUCTION
The following important geomechanical units can be distinguished in the area of Novi Sad:
areas with loess, landslide areas, area in the Danube zone, alluvial plateau of the Danube.
Extensive and detailed tests of the terrain were conducted in all the above-mentioned areas
for various buildings. The large number of tests was required as a result of intensive
136
construction works in the city. All areas have their own specifics in the structure of the terrain
and the type of specific problems related to construction. This paper presents only the typical
examples that can be of general use for future testing and construction both in the area of
Novi Sad and in the wider area. All the tests shown here were carried out by the authors of
this paper.
EXAMPLE – STRUCTURE ON LOESS
Loess horizons are contained in areas in both the northern and southern slopes of the Fruška
Gora Mountain. There are many loess plateaus in the area of Novi Sad, which also construct
folded areas between the Fruška Gora streams almost all the way to the Danube. The
considered example and the problem of founding on loess are summarized in this paper using
the example of the FABUS faculty building located on the Mišeluk plateau.
The loess sediments are represented by loess horizons and fossil soil. The loess is of a dirty
yellow color and the fossil soil is a shade of reddish-brown. The first loess horizon possesses
a pronouncedly tubular macro-porosity. The size of the macro-pores is up to 1.5 cm without
secondary accumulations of carbonates. The thickness of the first loess horizon is about 4 m.
In the surface layer of the terrain, up to a depth of 0.3 m, the soil is intensively humified. The
deeper loess horizons are characterized by the presence of small-tubular porosity with
sporadic concretions of carbonates.
The fossil soil differs from the loess sediments by its characteristic color and represents
paleo-pedological strata created during the warmer climatic intervals of the ice age. The first
fossil soil has a porosity of a tubular structural type. There are no secondary carbonate
concretions. The rest of the fossil soil horizons have a changed primary structure. It is
dominated by small-crack porosity and in the shallower zone by small-tubular porosity. The
color varies from dark to light brown. The carbonate content is also variable. It appears in
the form of irregular concretions up to 5 cm in size, but typically 2 cm in size, and in the form
of carbonate veins so that they occasionally take on the appearance of a web-like structure.
The thickness of the fossil soil is 1 m – 1.5 m.
The faculty building is founded in loess in an area without groundwater. Major damage to
the property is caused by the water leaking from water pipes. In the course of the investigation
it was determined the an unusually large quantity of water is penetrating the foundation.
Because of that, the water supply was inspected and it was determined that there was an
uncontrolled loss of water coming out of the fire-suppression supply, which was immediately
shut off.
The damage was visible on almost all the walls and ceilings throughout the building.
Geodetic measurements of the settlement of the building were carried out on the installed
measurement points (Fig. 1) in order to monitor the behavior of the building (VasLüHWDO
2012). A certain number of measuring points was installed into the building during its
construction, while the remaining ones were installed after the damage to the building had
occurred. Measured settlement are shown in Fig. 2.
137
Figure 1. The layout of the measuring points on the building

Slika 1. Osnova objekta sa reperima
1-Dec 1-Jan 1-Feb 1-Mar 1-Apr 1-May

0
10
settlement (mm)
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
R1 R2 R3 R5 R7 R10
Figure 2. Settlement measured using the measuring points

Slika 2. Izmerena sleganja na reperima
EXAMPLE – STRUCTURE ON LANDSLIDE
Landslides have been registered on the slopes of Fruška Gora, with the largest and deepest
of them being on the right valley side of the Danube. The paper provides a brief overview of
the landslide in the area of the Liberty Bridge.
138
Investigatory boreholes ascertained that the stationary-stable part of the terrain, in its deepest
part, is made up of shallow-water Pliocene sediments or so-called paludin layers. This was
confirmed by the discovery and identification of certain representative fossil remains. From
a lithological viewpoint, the sediments are present mainly in grey marl clay and in aleurites,
which are also grey in colour. Sands are substantially less present. In addition to the listed
sediments, coal clay, red marl and lignite layers are also present. All of the listed sediments
are clearly layered and are inclined towards the Danube at an angle of 2q-5q (Fig. 3).
Figure 3. Geotechnical Cross-section of the area Bridge Sloboda

6OLND*HRWHKQLþNLSUHVHNWHUHQDX]RQLPRVWD6ORERGH
The landslide moves slowly, parallel with the movements of the bridge, at an average rate of
approximately 6 mm per year (ĈRJR et al., 2011). The movements were of a greater intensity
in the period from 1980 to 1990, at about 10 mm per annum. Later periods showed
movements of about 2 to 4 mm per year. In spite of the fact that the bridge is founded on
reinforced concrete piles, and movements are very slow, the safety of the bridge is still
jeopardised by the sliding soil. Other points of interest in this paper include detailed research
conducted on the landslide, and the possibility of implementing the costly countermeasures
included in the project in stages. The stages can be executed as the need arises, based on the
overall monitoring of the landslide.
During the bombing, the bridge was demolished and then rebuilt. This led to the interruption
of repairing efforts on the landslide. Landslides of this type require continuous monitoring of
behaviour and repairing should be conducted in phases, as outlined in the construction project
139
9DVLüHWDO. Extensive testing of this landslide, especially in the zone of its major
sliding planes, has provided very important data from the aspect of repairing of Danube-type
landslides.
EXAMPLE – STRUCTURE ON THE DANUBE
The Danube in the area of Novi Sad has variable width, and it is narrowest at Petrovaradin
Fortress. The flat area along the Danube contains alluvial sediments, except for active
landslides along the Danube, where there are no alluvial sediments. There are several bridges
in Novi Sad that have been founded in the Danube bed, while this paper presents only the old
Petrovaradin Bridge, which was demolished in the World War II (ĈRJR et al., 2006). The
piers of the bridge, which are closer to the Petrovaradin Fortress, are founded in hard diabase
rocks, the rest of them are founded in alluvial and Pliocene sediments (Fig. 4). All the other
bridges on the Danube in Novi Sad are founded on deep piles.
Figure 4. Cross section of terrain in the bridge zone

6OLND3RSUHþQLSUHVHNWHUHQDX]RQLPRVWD
In the continuation of the bridge, a tunnel was constructed through the hill of the Petrovaradin
Fortress (ĈRJR et al., 2011). The tunnel was executed through two geotechnical units, namely
diabase and Pliocene sediments (Fig. 5). Diabase is a favourable environment and from the
time of its construction about 80 years ago, the tunnel is without any timberwork. The
Pliocene sediment environment is worse for tunnel construction, and this part of the tunnel
has been strengthened with walls.
140
Figure 5.Geotechnical cross-section of the tunnel

6OLND*HRWHKQLþNLSUHVHNNUR]WXQHO
The example of the tunnel highlights the importance of choosing the environment where the
tunnel will be built. In this respect, the route and the level of the tunnel on the new Fruška
Gora corridor should also be taken into account.
EXAMPLE - STRUCTURE ON ALLUVIAL SEDIMENTS
The Danube’s alluvion is about 3 km wide. Its thickness is between 20 m and 25 m. In the
surface area of the alluvion up to a depth of about 5 m are the youngest Danube sediments
where there are thicker or thinner lentiform muddy layers and clayey sediments with organic
matter. In some areas there are no muddy sediments. Below the mud there are sands which
possess favorable characteristics. These sands are present at depths between 5 m and 20 m.
The deepest zone of the Danube’s alluvion is made up of gravel. Below the Danube’s alluvion
are the Pliocene marls and clays. A free groundwater aquifer, which is in direct hydraulic
connection with the Danube, was formed in the Danube’s alluvion.
There are two possibilities from the aspect of geomechanical conditions of founding a large
number of objects in the alluvion of Novi Sad in the areas where there are poor soil: the first
is replacing the poor soil with coarse-grained soil; the second option is installing piles. Many
buildings were wrongly founded, so piles were installed also in locations that did not require
their inclusion. This paper presents the example of neutralization pool at the Novi Sad
Refinery (Fig. 6) where cracks occurred on the old pool as a result of sludge and inadequate
founding, which required building a new pool next to it (ĈRJR et al., 2012).
141
Figure 6. CPT diagrams for the new and old neutralizing tanks
Slika 6. CPT dijagrami za novi i stari neutralizacioni bazen
CONCLUSION
The area of Novi Sad consists of the northern slopes of the Fruška Gora Mountain and the
flat area with alluvial sediments of the Danube. The intensive construction works in the city,
especially in the last 20 years, has imposed the need for detailed geomechanical testing of
the terrain for high-rise buildings, bridges on the Danube, deeply buried parts of buildings,
as well as for the purpose of testing and remediating a number of landslides along the right
valley side of the Danube.
From the aspect of landslides, the conclusion is that geomechanical testing and repairing
works should be carried out on a continuous basis rather than with interruptions, as it has
been done so far. The geometry of major landslides is generally known, while their dynamics
remains largely unknown.
Recently, there is a tendency towards constructing facilities with several underground floors.
This requires more complex geomechanical solutions and a more detailed soil testing.
Mistakes are often made when founding such objects, as it is the case with the Promenada
shopping-mall in Novi Sad.
142
Acknowledgments
This work was financially supported by research grant No. TR36043 of the Serbian Ministry
of Science and Technological Development.
REFERENCES:
ĈRJR09DVLü0: Landslide in the area of the bridge on the Danube in Novi Sad. Proceedings of
the ICE - Geotechnical Engineering, Volume 164, Issue 1, pp. 3-10, London 2011.
ĈRJR09DVLü0ûRVLü0: Engineering geological evaluation of the conditions for constructing
a bridge and a tunnel in the zone of the old Petrovaradin Fortress. Bulletin of Engineering
Geology & the Environment, Volume 70, Number 1, pp. 139-142, Springer, Berlin 2011.
ĈRJR09DVLü0: Geotechnical investigations for the oil Refinery in Novi Sad. 11th Australia -
New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, ANZ 2012 Conference Proceedings, pp.
1118-1122, Melbourne 2012.
ĈRJR09DVLü0.: Geotechnical conditions for building of a new bridge in a place of the old one
on Danube in the zone of Petrovaradin fortress. INDIS 2006 Tenth national and fourth
international scientific meeting, Proceedings, pp. 213-218, Novi Sad 2006.
VaVLü0ĈRJR0.: Settlement of the Fabus building due to the infiltration of water into the loess
soil. GNP 2012. 4 internacionalni nauþQR-VWUXþQLVNXS*UDÿHYLQDUVWYR-nauka i praksa,
Zbornik radova, pp. 1231-1236, Žabljak 2012.
VaVLü0ĈRJR0, Jelisavac, B.: Terrain drainage in the landslide area on the Danube slope in
Novi Sad. Technical Gazette, Volume 22, Number 4, pp. 1075-1083, Osijek 2015.
143
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.3(497.6)
PRIMJENJIVOST TERENSKIH ISTRAŽNIH

RADOVA PREMA EN 1997 – 2:2006, NA
LOKACIJI POSTROJENJA FILTERA U
TERMOELEKTRANI UGLJEVIK 1
1HÿRĈXULü1'LMDQDĈXULü20LODQ3HULãLü1
1
7HKQLþNLLQVWLWXW%LMHOMLQD5HSXEOLND6USVND%RVQDL+HUFHJRYLQD
e. mail, nedjo@tehnicki-institut.com
2
*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW6XERWLFD8QLYHU]LWHW1RYL6DG6UELMD
REZIME
Dugogodišnjim radom 7HUPRHOHNWUDQH8JOMHYLNGRWUDMDRMHSRVWRMHüLILOWHUWHVHXND]DOD
SRWUHED ]D L]JUDGQMRP QRYRJ VDYUHPHQLMHJ VKRGQR YDåHüLP ]DNRQVNLP SURSLVLPD L
VWDQGDUGLPD X REODVWL RþXYDQMD åLYRWQH VUHGLQH ,]JUDGQMD ILOWHUD MH QD SRVWRMHüRM ORNDFLML
GMHOLPLþQR SURãLUHQRM RE]LURP QD EXGXüH JDEDULWH REMHNWD Filter je u dijelu terena gdje
VPMHãHWHQYHüLEURMREMHNDWDWHUPRHOHNWUDQHUD]OLþLWHYHOLþLQHLNRQVWUXNFLMH7HUHQMHVORåHQH
JHRORãNHJUDÿHMHUVHQDOD]LXGLMHOXDOXYLMDOQHUDYQLULMHNH-DQMHJGMHVHOLWRORãNLþODQRYL
þHVWRVPMHQMXMXSRYHUWLNDOLELORGDVXWRWODLOLVWLMHQH=QDþDMREMHNDWDLVORåHQRVWJHRORãNH
JUDÿH]DKWLMHYDOLVXGHWDOMQDJHRORãNDLVWUDåLYDQMDNRMDVXLSURYHGHQDXSHULRGXSULMHQMLKRYH
izgradnje. Dokumentacija je YUHPHQRP QDMYHüLP GLMHlom nestala, ali se raspolagalo sa
dokumentacijom koja je UDÿHQD]DQRYHREMHNWHWHUPRHOHNWUDQH SUHGYLÿHQL u neposrednoj
blizini. 3RUHGNODVLþQLKLVWUDåLYDQMDSULPMHQMLYDQLKQDRYLPSURVWRULPDLYDåHüLP]DNRQVNLP
propisima, planirana su sva istraživanja pUHGYLÿHQD(1QRUPDPDDUHDOL]RYDQDVXPRJXüDX
]DYLVQRVWLRGJHRORãNHJUDÿHWHUHQDLPRJXüQRVWLSULPMHQHRGVUHÿHQLKLVSLWLYDQMDQDWHUHQX
./-8ý1(5,-(ý,istraživanje terena, geološke sredine, geotHKQLþNLSDUDPHWUL
APPLICABILITY OF FIELD INVESTIGATION

WORKS ACCORDING TO EN 1997 – 2:2006, ON
LOCATION OF FILTER PLANTS IN THERMAL
POWER PLANT UGLJEVIK 1
ABSTRACT
Many years of operation of Thermal power plant Ugljevik 1, worn out the existing filter,
which made place for the construction of a new, more efficient one, according to regulations
and standards in the area of environmental protection. Construction of a filter is in an existing
location, partially expanded considering the future size of the plant. The filter is in the part of
the terrain where several thermal power plants of different sizes and constructions are located.
Terrain is of complex geological composition because it is on the part of an alluvial plain of
144
Janja river, where lithologic members often alternate vertically, whether they are rocks or
soils. The importance of the facilities and the complexity of the geological structure required
detailed geological surveys, which were carried out in the period prior to their construction.
In time documentation mostly disappeared, so it was used the documentation that was made
for new objects of thermal power plant, that were predicted in the immediate proximity. In
addition to the classic research applied in this area and the applicable legal regulations, all
research according to EN standards were planned., and are realized only possible depending
on the geological structure of the terrain and the possibility of applying certain terrain
research.
KEY WORDS: terrain research, geological encironments, geotechnical parameters
UVOD
Istraživanje terena LSURUDþXQL]DWHPHOMHQMHREMHNWD)LOWHUD za Termoelektranu Ugljevik 1,

zahtijevano je da bude u skladu sa euro normama, odnosno Eurocodu 7, EN 1997 – 1 i EN
1997- 5DQLMD LVWUDåLYDQMD QLVX ELOD GRVWXSQD DOL SUHJOHG QHNLK SURQDÿHQLK LVWUDåLYDQMD
pokazao je du su kvalitetno vršena i raspolagalo se sa dovoljnim obimom podataka za
sagledavanje karakteristika terena. Ipak ta istraživanja nisu bila dovoljna, kao i novija koja
VXYUãHQDXQHSRVUHGQRMRNROLQL]DL]JUDGQMXEXGXüLKREMHNDWDQRYHWHUPRHOHNWUDQH
Provedena istraživanja su u dijelu sagledavanja karakteristika šire okoline i same lokacije.
Šira istraživanja su obuhvatila razvoj morfologije reljefa i tektonske aktivnosti u prošlosti, a
uža karakter nastanka aluvijalne ravni rijeke Janje i katakteristike sedimenata i stijena u
vertikalnom profilu.
2ELPLVWUDåLYDQMDMH]DGRYROMDYDMXüLLREXKYDWLRMHVYDPRJXüDLVWUDåLYDQMDSULPMHQOMLYDQD
RYRPWHUHQX'LRLVWUDåLYDQMDNRMDVHSUHGYLÿDMX(1QRUPDPDQHRGQRVHVHQDRYDNYHWHUHQH
i ona su izostala, ali su navedena u tabelama, kao prikaz potrebnih istraživanja, zavisno od
terena na kome se nalazimo.
PROVEDENA ISTRAŽIVANJA NA TERENU
Kartiranje terena obavljeno je i u širem prostoru lokacije, pregledom svih prirodnih izdanaka
i izdanaka u zasjecima koji su otvoreni, a u cilju što detaljnijeg sagledavanMDJHRORãNHJUDÿH
WHUHQD3ULOLNRPNDUWLUDQMDSRVHEQDSDåQMDMHSRVYHüHQDUD]GYDMDQMXþYUVWLKVWMHQVNLPPDVD
(kamenite i polukamenite) od poluvezanih i nevezanih (deluvijalnih, deluvijalno –
eluvijalnih, proluvijalnih LDOXYLMDOQLKVHGLPHQDWD7DNRÿH]QDþDMQD SDåQMDMHSRVYHüHQDL
SRMDYDPD]DEDUHQMDSLãWHYLQDNDRLGUXJLPVOLþQLPSRMDYDPDXWHUHQXNRMHPRJXELWLRG
]QDþDMD]DRFMHQXXVORYDL]JUDGQMHREMHNDWD ĈXULü, N. 2011).
*HRPHKDQLþNDEXãHQMDXUDÿHQDVXrotacionom metodom bez upotrebe vode u koherentnim i
nekoherentnim materijalima tla, a sa upotrebom vode u stijenama. Za slabovezane i nevezane
sedimente kRULãWHQH VX NODVLþQH MHGQRVWUXNH VUåQH FLMHYL D u stijenskom materijalu duple
sržne cjevi SRþHWQRJ SUHþQLND Ø 116 mm, a završnog Ø 101 mm. Jezgrovanje je vršeno
NRQWLQXLUDQRDSURFHQDWL]YDÿHQRJMH]JUDL]QRVLRMHpreko 98% od svakog dužnog intervala
145
od 5 m. Jezgro bušotina slagano je u sanduke, fotografisano, detaljno inženjersko-geološki

kartirano a potom su odabrani uzorci za laboratorijska ispitivanja. U bušotinama su provedeni
opiti standardne GLQDPLþNH penetracije (SPT) L SUDüHQD SRMDYD L QLYR YRGD WH XJUDÿHQL
SLH]RPHWUL]DRVPDWUDQMHQLYRDGRYUHPHQDSRþHWNDJUDÿHQMDREMHNWD 1DMGDQRYLü, N. i sar.
1981, 0DNVLPRYLü, M.M. 2001). Tokom i]YRÿHQMDEXãHQMDQLMHUHJLVWURYDQRXVSRVWDYOMDQMH
KLGUDXOLþNHYH]HL]PHÿXEXãRWLQDRGQRVQRSRMDYDLVSODNHXVXVMHGQLPEXãRWLQDPD
3DUDOHOQRVDL]YRÿHQMHPLVWUDåQRJEXãHQMDYUãHQRMHGHWDOMQRinženjerskogeološko kartiranje
MH]JUDSULþHPXMHXUDÿHQDGHWDOMQDLGHQWLILNDFLMDLNODVLILNDFLMDQDEXãHQRJPDWHULMDOD
3ODQX]RUNRYDQMDSULODJRÿen je na osnovu novih podataka i podataka iz okolnih radova kako
EL VH X]RUFL L] LVWRJ OLWRORãNRJ þODQD X]HOLQD UD]OLþLWLP GXELQDPD L] provedenih istražnih
radova. ND WDM QDþLQ ostvarila se PRJXüQRVW detaljnijeg definisanja pojedinih litoloških
þODQRYDNDNRSRYHUWLNDOQRP]DOLMHJDQMXWDNRLSRKRUL]RQWDOQRPUDVSURVWLUDQMX
Primjenjivost terenskih istraživih radova prema EN 1997–2:2006 (EurocRGH*HRWHKQLþND
istraživanja - dioI I) na istražnim bušotinama B -1 do B - 4. prikazana je u tabeli br. 1. Za
VYDNLWHUHQVNLLWUDåQLUDGGMHOLPLþQRDQHJGMHLSRWSXQRVHUD]OLNXMHSULPMHQOMLYRVWRGUHÿHQLK
RSLWD1DLVWUDåLYDQRPWHUHQXYHüLEURMRSLWDQije primijenjen, od kojih neki nisu primjenljivi
QDRYDNYRPWHUHQX3ULPLMHQMHQLRSLWLSRND]XMXGDVXNDWHJRULMHWODUD]OLþLWHRGEXãRWLQHGR
bušotine.
7DEHODEU3ULND]PRJXüLKLL]YHGHQLKWHUHQVNLKLVWUDåQLJUDGRYD na bušotinama B - 1 do B - 4
Kategorije Terenski opiti NPV

izorkovanja
Metode terenskih
Istraživanja
Zatvoreni
Otvoreni
Tlo Stijena
Presio-
sistem
sistem
DPH /
CPTU
DPSH
CPT I
DPL /
metar
DMT
DPM
WST
FWT
RDT
SDT
PLT
SPT
Parametri tla
A B C A B C
Osnovne
informacije
C2 F2
Vrsta tla - - - - - - - - F2 C2 F3 - - - - - - - -
F3 C2
Vrsta stijene - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Raspored slojeva F3 C2 F2 C2 C2 F3 - - - - F2 C2 F3 - - - - - - - -
Nivo podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F3 -
vode
Pritisak podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
vode
*HRPHKDQLþNL
parametri
C2 F2
9HOLþLQD]UQD - - - - - - - - F2 F3 - - - - - - - -
F3 C2
C2 F2
Vlažnost - - - - - - - - F2 F3 - - - - - - - -
F3 C2
Atterbergove C2
F2 - - - - - - - - F2 F3 - - - - - - - -
granice F3
Zapreminska C2 F2
- - - - - - - - F2 F3 - - - - - - - -
masa F3 C2
Ugao unutrašnjeg C2
F2 - - - - - - - - F2 C2 F3 - - - - - - - -
trenja F3
C2
Kohezija F2 - - - - - - - - F2 F3 - - - - - - - -
F3
C2 F2
Vodopropusnost - - - - - - - - F2 F3 - - - - - - - -
F3 C2
Hemijski opiti - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
146

izorkovanja
Metode terenskih
istraživanja
Zatvoreni
Tlo Stijena
Otvoreni
Presio-
sistem
sistem
DPH /
CPTU
DPSH
CPT I
DPL /
metar
DMT
DPM
WST
FWT
RDT
SDT
PLT
SPT
Parametri tla A B C A B C
Osnovne
informacije
C3
C3 C1 C3 C1 C2
Vrsta tla - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2 C2
C2
Vrsta stijene - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C3 C1 C2
Raspored slojeva F3 C2 F3 C3 C1 C2 C2 - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2
Nivo podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F3 -
vode
Pritisak podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
vode
*HRPHKDQLþNL
parametri
C3
C3 C1 C3 C1 C2
9HOLþLQD]UQD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2 C2
C2
C3
C3 C1 C3 C1 C2
Vlažnost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2 C2
C2
Atterbergove C3
- - - - - - - - - C3 C2 - - - - - - - -
granice C2
C3
C2 C1 C3 C1 C2
Zapreminska masa - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2 C2
C2
Ugao unutrašnjeg C3 C3 C1 C2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
trenja C2 C2
C3
Kohezija - - - - - - - - - C3 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
C3
C2 C1 C3 C1 C2
Vodopropusnost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2 C2
C2
C3
Hemijski opiti - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2
izorkovanja
Metode terenskih
istraživanja
Zatvoreni
Tlo Stijena
Otvoreni
Presio-
sistem
sistem
DPH /
CPTU
DPSH
CPT I
DPL /
metar
DMT
DPM
WST
FWT
RDT
SDT
PLT
SPT
Osnovne
informacije
C2 F3 C2 C2
Vrsta tla - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2
Vrsta stijene - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Raspored slojeva - - - - - F2 C2 F3 - - - - - - - -
Nivo podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F3 -
vode
147
Pritisak podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
vode
*HRPHKDQLþNL
parametri
C2
9HOLþLQD]UQD - - - - - - - - - C2 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
C2
Vlažnost - - - - - - - - - C2 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
Atterbergove
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
granice
C2
Zapreminska masa - - - - - - - - - C2C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
Ugao unutrašnjeg F3 C2 C2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
trenja C2
Kohezija - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2
Vodopropusnost - - - - - - - - - C2 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
Hemijski opiti - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
izorkovanja
Metode terenskih
istraživanja
Zatvoreni
Tlo Stijena
Otvoreni
Presio-
sistem
sistem
DPH /
CPTU
DPSH
CPT I
DPL /
metar
DMT
DPM
WST
FWT
RDT
SDT
PLT
SPT
Osnovne
informacije
C2 F3 C2 C2
Vrsta tla - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2 C2
Vrsta stijene - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Raspored slojeva - - - - - F2 C2 F3 - - - - - - - -
Nivo podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F3 -
vode
Pritisak podzemne
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
vode
*HRPHKDQLþNL
parametri
C2
9HOLþLQD]UQD - - - - - - - - - C2 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
C2
Vlažnost - - - - - - - - - C2 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
Atterbergove
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
granice
C2
Zapreminska masa - - - - - - - - - C2C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
Ugao unutrašnjeg F3 C2 C2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
trenja C2
Kohezija - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C2
Vodopropusnost - - - - - - - - - C2 C2 - - - - - - - -
C2
Hemijski opiti - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
148
LEGENDA:
CPT VWDWLþNDSHQHWUDFLMD
DPL GLQDPLþNDSHQHWUDFLMDODND
DPSH GLQDPLþNDSHQHWUDFLMDVXSHUWHãND
RDT dilatometar za stijenu
WST VWDWLþNDSHQHWUDFLMDVDWHJRP
CPTU VWDWLþNDSHQHWUDFLMDVDPMHUHQMHPSRUQRJSULWLVND
DPM GLQDPLþNDSHQHWUDFLMDVUHGQMD
FVT terenska krilna sonda
SDT dilatometar za tlo
DMT plosnati dilatometar
DPH GLQDPLþNDSHQHWUDFLMDWHãND
PLT SUREQDSORþDXEXãRWLQL
SPT standardni penetracioni test
Otvoreni sistem: pijezometar koji mjeri pritisak težinom stuba vode

Zatvoreni sistem: pijezometar koji mjeri pritisak vode neposredno
Primjenjivost:
C krupnozrno tlo
F sitnozrno tlo
R stijena
1 jaka
2 srednja
3 slaba primjenjivost
Kategorije uzorkovanja za tlo (prema EN ISO 22475-1):

A WDQNR]LGQLX]RUNLYDþ
B uzorak iz sržne cijevi ili SPT-a
C uzorak iz bušenja ispiranjem
LABORATORIJSKA ISPITIVANJA
/DERUDWRULMVNDLVSLWLYDQMDX]RUDNDXUDÿHQDVXQDQHSRUHPHüHQLPLSRUHPHüHQLPX]RUFLPD
tla. 'RVWDYOMHQLX]RUFLXODERUDWRULMLVXSURãOLVMHGHüXSURFHGXUX:
x popis svih uzoraka sa upisanim podacima o broju bušotine, dubine uzimanja uzorka,
litološkog opisa i datuma prijema
x VHOHNFLMDX]RUDNDSUHPDYUVWLQHSRUHPHüHQLLSRUHPHüHQL)
x selekcija uzoraka prema projektovanim i zahtijevanim vrstama potrebnih
laboratorijskih ispitivanja
x skladištenje svih uzoraka u prostoriji za njegovanje uzoraka gdje QHüH GRüL GR
narušavanja osnovnih karakteristika uzoraka (prirodna vlažnost, struktura i oblik),
149
Raspored ispitivanja proveden je SR UHGRVOMHGX SUHGYLÿHQRP X SURMHNWX LVWUaživanja i

ispitivanja.
Ispitivanja su XUDÿHQDQDX]RUNDRGþHJDQHSRUHPHüHQLKL SRUHPHüHQLKX]RUDNDWOD
/DERUDWRULMVNDLVSLWLYDQMDSRUHPHüHQLKX]RUDNDX]RUDNDREXKYDWLODVX
x zapreminsku težinu u prirodnom i suvom stanju

x sadržaja vlage
x granuloPHWULMVNX DQDOL]X VD RGUHÿLYDQMHP NRHILFLMHQDWD YRGRSURSXVQRVWL L REOLND
zrna te procentualnog sadržaja gline, prašine, pijeska i šljunka u uzorku
/DERUDWRULMVNDLVSLWLYDQMDQHSRUHPHüHQLKX]RUDNDREXKYDWLODVX
x RGUHÿLYDQMH VSHFLILþQHWHåLQH
x zapreminske mase i težine u priroGQRPVXYRPL]DVLüHQRPVWDQMX
x JUDQXORPHWULMVNX DQDOL]X VD RGUHÿLYDQMHP NRHILFLMHQDWD YRGRSURSXVQRVWL L REOLND
zrna te procentualnog sadržaja gline, prašine, pjeska i šljunka
x Aterrberg-ove granice plastiþQRVWL
x ispitivanje modula stišljivosti - edometarski opit
x LVSLWLYDQMHSDUDPHWDUDVPLFDMQHþYUVWRüH - direktno smicanje
x ispitivanje standardnog bubrenja i aktivnosti gline
6WDQGDUGLSRNRMLPDVXYUãHQDLVSLWLYDQMDVXVOLMHGHüL (Eurocode 7. Geotechnical desing – Part

2).
Prirodna vlažnost JUS U.B1. 012 BAS CEN ISO/TS 17892-1: 2009
Zapreminska težina JUS U.B1. 013 BAS CEN ISO/TS 17892-2: 2009
6SHFLILþQDWHåLQD JUS U.B1. 014 BAS CEN ISO/TS 17892-3: 2009
Granulometrijski sastav JUS U.B1. 018 BAS CEN ISO/TS 17892-4: 2009
Granice konsistencije JUS U.B1. 020 ASTM D4318-10
6PLþXüHþYUVWRüH JUS U.B1. 028 BAS CEN ISO/TS 17892-10: 2009
Stišljivost JUS U.B1. 032 BAS CEN ISO/TS 17892-5: 2009
PRIKAZ REZULTATA ISTRAŽIVANJA
Prostor na kome su vršena detaljna geološka istraživanja nalazi se u krugu Termoelektrane

Ugljevik 1, LSUHGVWDYOMD]DSDGQLGLR8JOMHYLþNRJQHRJHQRJEDVHQD6PMHãWHQMHGXåGHVQH
obale rijeke Janja - Modra, koja je formirala aluvijalnu dolinu generalnog pružanja zapad –
istok.
Morfološke karakteristike ãLUHJ SRGUXþMD VX SRVOMHGLFD VORåHQH JHRORãNH JUDÿH NRMX
karakterišu blage forme reljefa sa valovitim brežuljcima, a u pravcu sjevera prelaze u sub
horizontalne terasne terene.
150
PUHGPHWQRSRGUXþMHi bližu okolinu, u odnosu na genezu, karakterišu dva tipa reljefa: fluvio
– akumulacioni i eroziono denudacioni. Sa aspekta hipsometrijskih i morfometrijskih
RELOMHåMDUD]YLMHQLVXUDYQLþDUVNLLEUGVNLWLS5DYQLþDUVNLWLSRGQRVQRIOXYLR – akumulacioni
tip reljefa razvijen je na visinama od 168 mnm, na sjevernom djelu, odnosno do 172 mnm,
na krajnjem južnom djelu. To je akumulacioni prostor rijeke Janje i potoka Mezgrajice koji
obuhvata širi istraživani prostor, kao i prostor sjeverno, sjeverozapadno i južno od
istraživanog terena.
Brdski tip odnosno eroziono – denudacioni tip reljefa razvijen je zapadno od predmetne
lokacije. Posmatrano u odnosu na istraživani dio terena hipsometrijski se spušta od visina
303 mnm do zaravni rijeke Janje, slika 1.
Slika 1. Reljefni oblici u bližePLãLUHPSRGUXþMX Termoelektrana u Ugljeviku

(lijevo Termoelektrana Ugljevik 1, desno planirana Termoelektrana Ugljevik 3)
1DM]QDþDMQLML SRYUãLQVNL YRGRWRN MH ULMHND -DQMD NRMD VD VYRMLP YHüLP SULWRNDPD
0H]JUDMLFRP 8JOMHYLþNRP ULMHNRP L 0LüLüD SRWRNRP SULSDGD VOLYX ULMHNH 'ULQH Rijeka
Janja ima regulisano korito izvan lokacije termoelektrana, dok se ranije prirodno korito
pružalo središnjim dijelom predmetne lokacije.
Mikrolokacija istražnog prostora smještena je u UDYQLþDUVNRP GLMHOX L SULSDGD fluvio –

akumulacionom tipu reljefa, razvijenom na visinama do oko 168 mnm. Prirodna morfologija
istraživane lokacijaje, kao i njena bliža okolina je izmjenjena, odnosno dovedena u niveletu
RG GR P RELPQLP JUDÿHYLQVNLP ]DKYDWLPD ]D SRWUHEH L]JUDGQMH
Termoelektrane Ugljevik 1, i nedovršene Termoelektrane Ugljevik 2, a površina terena
prekrivena tehnogenim materijalom.
151
Geološke karakteristike ãLUHJ SRGUXþMD, vezane su sedimente WHUFLMDUQH VWDURVWL NRML þLQH
osnovno gorje ili substrat terena. Stijene osnovnog gorja prekrivene su sedimentima kvartara
te su na padinama okolnih brda, istaloženi padinski – deluvijalni i deluvijalno - proluvijalni
VHGLPHQWL D X GROLQDPD SRWRND GHSRQRYDQL VX DOXYLMDOQL VHGLPHQWL 1D þLWDYRP SURVWRUX
istraživane lokacije, aluvijalni sedimenti prekriveni su tehnogenim tvorevinama –
materijalom nasipa.
3UHPDWHNWRQVNRMUHMRQL]DFLML2*.OLVWD%UþNRLVWUDåLYDQRSRGUXþMHi njegova bliža okolina

pripadaju JUDQLþQRPSURVWRUXL]PHÿXGYMLMHVWUXNWXUQR–facijelne jedinice. To su: strukturno
– facijelna jedinica ubranog kompleksa Majevice i jedinica neogenih basena, odnosno
8JOMHYLþNL QHRJHQL ED]HQ 3UYX NDUDNWHULãX JOLQFL L SMHãþDUL D GUXJX L]JUDÿXMX VHGLPHQWL
miocena, uglavnom laporac i laporovite stjene.
8JOMHYLþNLQHRJHQLED]HQ kome pripada istraživana lokacija karakteriše intenzivna tektonika,

koja je utvrÿHQD LVWUDåLYDQMLPD X VYUKX HNVSORDWDFLMH XJOMD L JHRORãNLP SUDüHQMHP
eksploatacije uglja. 7DNRÿHUasjedne linije (zone) sXSRWYUÿHQHSUHWKRGQLPJHRWHKQLþNLP
istraživanjima u bližoj okolini neposredne lokacije,]GYRMHQDVXUDVMHGDUD]OLþLWHSURVWRUQH
orjentacijeR]QDþHQLRG5 1 do R 4. 1DL]QDþDMQLMLUDVMHG za istraživanu lokaciju je rasjed R 4
NRMLMHGHWDMQLMHGHILQLVDQWRNRPLVWUDåQRJEXãHQMDXNOMXüXMXüLJHRIL]LþNDLVWUDåLYDQMD&URVV
Hole metoda) i superpozicioniranja slojeva na osnovu paleontoloških i meneraloško-
petroloških ispitivanja.
Hidrogeološke karakteristike terena uslovljene su heterogenim litološkim sastavom i

složenim tektonskim sklopom. Izdvajaju se hidrogeološke kategorije stijena od dobro
YRGRSURSXVQLK X VHGLPHQWLPD PHÿX]UQVNH SRUR]QRVWL GR YRGRQHSURSXVQLK VD ULMHWNRP
SUVOLQVNRPSRUR]QRãüX
Izdan podzemne vode zbijenog tipa formirana je u aluvijalnim šljuncima i pjescima, na dubini
oko 5,0 m. Kretanje podzemne vode RVFLOLUD WRNRP JRGLQH RE]LURPQD PHÿXVREQXYH]X
voda aluvijalne izdani i rijeke Janje. Prisustvo voda u materijalima nasipa oscilira u zavisnosti
od njegove zbijenosti. Nemaju YHüHJ]QDþDMDRE]LURPGDVXVRþLYDVWRJWLSD
Inženjerskogeološka svojstva terena istraživane lokacije, od površine terena do dubine

LVWUDåLYDQMDL]JUDÿXMXslojevi prirodnih sedimenata i tehnogeni materijali, slika 2.
x tehnogene tvorevine - nasip

x nevezane stijene
x slabo vezane stijene
Nasip (n) VH SURVWLUH QD þLWDYRM SRYUãLQL WHUHQD LVWUDåLYDQH ORNDFLMH Heterogenog je i
QHUDYQRPMHUQRJ VDVWDYD L]JUDÿHQ RG VORMHYD ãOMXQND SUDãLQDVWRJ GUREOMHQRJ DJUHJDWD
NUHþQMDNDLSMHãþDUDXJRUQMRM]RQLWHmaterijala aluvijalnih naslaga u donjoj zoniPRüQRVWL
oko 1,80 m.
152
+1.00
B-4 B-3 71°
0.00 0,1 Nasip - šljunak prašinast n1,381 0,1
-1.00 0,9
1,4 n3 Nasip - drobljeni agregat krecnjaka
n
3 i pješcara N.P.V.
2 n 1,6
-2.00
2,6 (3+7+9) Nasip - glina pjeskovita, meke konzistencije, muljevita,
-3.00
u masi valutice šljunka i odlomci pješcara 4 n
4,0 Glina pjeskovita, šljunkovita, 4,0
1
-4.00
CS
N.P.V. 5,00
-5.00 5,0 sivo smede boje TEMELJ POSTOJECEG OBJEKATA
-6.00 5,9
Glina laporovita, tvrde konzistencije, niske 6,3 6,2
-7.00
7,0 (33+28+38) 6,4
C,G CL,S do srednje plasticnosti, crveno smede boje 6,7 7,2 (8+9+14)
7,5
S
-8.00
-9.00
2 S C Pijesak zaglinjen, sitnozrn do srednjezrn, 8,3
konsolidovan, plavo sive boje
7,8
-10.00
-11.00
-12.00
9,7 (36+42+47
11,0
11,5 (37+>51)
)
9,8
12,0
Pijesak zaglinjen, srednjezrn, konsolidovan, u masi
srednje zaobljene valutice pješcara, plavo sive boje
2 10,0 (>51)
10,6
12,0 (>51) 12,0
-13.00
-14.00
Slika 2. Inženjerskogeološki profil terena
Nevezanim stijenama pripadaju aluvijalni SLMHVDN JOLQRYLW ãOMXQNRYLW L ãOMXQDN ,]JUDÿXMX

jugozapadni dio lokacije i isklinjavaju, ili su uklonjeni tehnogenim zahvatima, u pravcu
sjevera. Maksimalna debljina je oko 1,8 m.
Slabo vezane stijene, po genetskoj pripadnost i pripadaju im: kompleks aluvijalnih

sedimenata, sedimenti kore trošenja substrata terena i stijene substrata terena.
U granicama kompleksa aluvijalnih sedimenata izdvojena su dva litološka tipa sedimenata.

1DMYHüH UDVSURVWUDQMHQMH SR GXELQL L SR KRUL]QWDOQRP SURVWLUDQju, imaju glina pjeskovita
šljunkovite i zaglinjeni šljunak. *UDQLFD L]PHÿX SLMHVND L ãOMXQND QDMþHãüH QLMH MDVQR
LVWDNQXWDWHVXþHVWLYDULMHWHWLãOMXQNDSMHVkovitog i pjeska šljunkovitog. Drugi litološki tip
sedimenata, u granicama kompleksa aluvijalnih sedimenata, predstavljen je glinama
pjeskovitim, muljevitim. Nemaju kontinuirano prostiranje veü VH X YLGX WDQMLK VRþLYD
pojavljuju lokalno i to uglavnom u pripovršinskom dijelu terena ĈXULü1DĈXULü1
2014b, Lokin, P. 1990)..
6WLMHQH NRUH UDVSDGDQMD VXEVWUDWD WHUHQD WDNRÿH SULSDGDMX Vlabo vezanim stijenama. To su
rastrošene i potpuno degradirane stijene substrata terena, poznate kao kora trošenja stijena
osnovnog gorja. HeWHURJHQRJVXVDVWDYDQHXMHGQDþHQHGHEOMLQHDOLNRQWLQXLUDQRXþHVWYXMXX
JUDÿLþLWDYHLVWUDåLYDQHORNDFLMH8RNYLUXRYLKVHGLPHQDWDL]GYRMHQDVXWULWLSDOLWRORãNDWLSD
x pUYL WLS SUHGVWDYOMDMD JOLQRYLWD GURELQD SMHãþDUD X YLGX WDQMLK VRþLYD SRMDYOMXMX
lokalno i to uglavnom u najvišim horizontima ovog kompleksa.
x dUXJL WLS SUHGVWDYOMDMX JOLQH ODSRURYLWH SMHVNRYLWH LVWDORåHQH WDNRÿH X YUãQLP
dijelovima kompleksa sedimenata kore trošenja substrata terena.
x tUHüL WLS SUHGVWDYOMDMX ]DJOLQMHQL SMHVNRYL NRML NRQWLQXLUDQR XþHVWYXMX X JUDÿL
lokacije i obrazuju dva horizonta.
o viši horizont karakteriše pjeskovitDIUDNFLMDVDYLVRNLPXãþHãüHPVLWQR]UQH
glinovito-prašinaste komponente
o niži horizontim je pjeskovito – šljunkovita frakcijD WDNRÿH VD YLVRNLP
XãþHãüHPVLWQR]UQHJOLQRYLWR-prašinaste komponente.
153
Slabo vezanLP VWLMHQDPD WDNRÿH SULSDGDMX ODSRURYLWH JOLQH NRMH L]JUDÿXMX YUãQH GLMHORYH
substrata WHUDQDDSULSDGDMXNRPSOHNVXODSRURYLWLKVHGLPHQDWDNRMLXþHVWYXMXXJUDÿLEOLåHL
šire okoline lokacije.
)L]LþNR - PHKDQLþND VYRMVWYD NDUWLUDQLK LQåHQMHUVNRJHRORãNLK MHGLQLFD XWYUÿHQD VX

terenskim istraživanjima na jezgru bušotina i laboratorijskim ispitivanjima na
reprezentativnim uzorcima pojedinih litoloških tipova tla ĈXULü1ĈXUDQ3F%DUOD
G. 1974). Vrijednosti osnovnih osnovnih parametara IL]LþNR – PHKDQLþNLK VYRMVWYD WOD L
stijena, za pojedine litološke tipove, kretale su se u širem rasponu. Usvojene vrijednost
parametara su srednje vrijednosti, dopunjene ocjenom terenskih istraživanja, slika 3.
,]GYRMHQHVXJHRORãNHVUHGLQHNRMHþLQHNRQVWUXNFLMXWHUHQHGRGXELQHXWLFDMDRSWHUHüHQMD
objekta ĈXNLü'.
Geot. Stratigraf. Litološka Oznaka Prema/

Fizicko - mehanicki Fizicko- mehan. parametri
sredina pripadnost oznaka na profilu EN 1997- Litološki tip/
parametri za litološki tip za geot. sredinu
2:2006
n1 Nasip-šljunak pjeskovit, prašinast
n2 Nasip-pomješani šljunak i glina

n Nasip-drobljeni agregat krecnjaka i pješcara
n3 pomješan sa prašinom i glinom
Nasip-glina pjeskovita, meke konzistencije, M= 23,0q
n4 muljevita, u masi valutice šljunka i odlomci Mv = 2 400 kPa
pješcara, sivo smede do sive boje
J = 19,50 kn/m³ M= 14,0q J = 19,00 kn/m³ M= 19,0q
1 al CS,G F3 Glina pjeskovita, šljunkovita, muljevita
c = 19,0 kPa Mv = 4 500 kPa c = 14,0 kPa Mv = 8 000 kPa
J = 19,90 kn/m³ M= 17,5q J = 19,90 kn/m³ M= 17,5q

2 CL,S F2 Glina laporovita, pjeskovita c = 18,0 kPa Mv = 5 000 kPa
c = 18,0 kPa Mv = 5 000 kPa
Pijesak zaglinjen, sitnozrn J = 19,00 kn/m³ M= 39,0q

Pc,E SC C2 do srednjezrn, konsolidovan c = 5,0 kPa Mv = 20 000 kPa J = 19,50 kn/m³ M= 21,0q
3 M=13.9q
c = 5,0 kPa Mv = 9 000 kPa
C,G Pijesak zaglinjen, srednjezrn, J = 19,29 kn/m³
S C2 šljunkovit, konsolidovan c = 14,4 kPa Mv = 3 6560 kPa
SliND*HRWHKQLþNLPRGHOWHUHQDXJUDQLFDPDXVYRMHQLKVUHGLQD
=D VYDNX RG VUHGLQD L]ERU IL]LþNR – PHKDQLþNLK SDUDPHWDUD PMHURGDYQLK ]D JHRVWDWLþNH
SURUDþXQHL]YUãHQMHQDRVQRYX &UQNRYLü%<X+6$0LWURYLü3
x UH]XOWDWD ODERUDWRULMVNLK LVSLWLYDQMD X]RUDND WOD YRGHüL UDþXQD R VWHpenu njihove

reprezentativnosti i uslova ispitivanja
x podataka o realnim svojstvima stjenskih masa aluvijalnog kompleksa, kompleksa
sedimenata kore trošenja substrata terena i sedimenata substrata (litološka
heterogenost, strukturno – teksturna svojstva, stepen površinske degradacije, i...)
Date vrijednosti parametara za izdvojene gološke sredine su realne vrijednosti za provedeni

stepen istraženosti terena.
=$./-8ý$.
Provedena istraživanja terena u skladu sa euro normama, odnosno Eurocodu 7, EN 1997 – 1

i EN 1997-2 (XURFRGH*HRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMD- dioI I) RPRJXüLODVXGDVHGHWDOMQLMH
sagledaju potrebne karakteristike terena za formiranje njegovog modela, koji odgovara
154
prLEOLåQR SULURGQRP VWDQMX 3ULPLMHQMHQD VX VYD PRJXüD LVWUDåLYDQMD QD RYDNYRP WHUHQX
L]RVWDYOMDMXüLRna istraživanja koja bi dala dobre rezultate ali nisu ovdje primjenljiva.
Izdvojene geološke sredine sa parametrima su izvršene na osnovu terenskih istraživanja i

laboratorijskih ispitivanja ĈXNLü'<X+6$0LWURYLü3). Dobivene
vrijednosti u laboratoriji su bile u širem rasponu, ali odabrane vrijednosti su uvažavale i
terenski opis stijena ili kompleksa stijena iz koga su uzeti uzorci. Terenski pregled i kontakt
VD X]RUNRP þHVWR GDMH MHGQR VWDQMH D GXJR VH GMHOLPLþQR L]PLMHQL L GDMH QHãWR UD]OLþLWH
rezultate u laboratoriji, posebno ako su sedimenti u kotaktu sa vodom. Zbog toga je terenska
RFMHQD ]QDþDMQD NRMD þHVWR PRåH ]D RGUHÿHQX VUHGLQX GDWL PRJXüQRVW SREROMãDQMD LOL
umanjenja vrijednosti pojedinih parametara.
LITERATURA
Barla G. (1974): Rock Anisotropy - Theory and Laboratory Testing, Rock Mechanics - International
Centre for Mechanical Science, ed. by L. Mul1er, Udine.
&UQNRYLü%3RVWRMHüHNODVLILNDFLMHVWLMHQVNLKPDVD0HKDQLNDVWLMHQDWHPHOMHQMHSRG]HPQL
UDGRYL'UXãWYRJUDÿHYLQVNLKLQåHQMHUDLWHKQLþDUD=DJUHEL'UXãWYR]DPHKDQLNXVWLMHQDL
podzemne radove Hrvatske. Zagreb, str. 211–233.
ĈXNLü'*HRWHKQLþNHNODVLILNDFLMH]DSRYUãLQVNHUDGRYHXUXGDUVWYXLJUDÿHYLQDUVWYX
Rudarski institut Tuzla.
ĈXULü1+LGURJHRORãNDLLQåHQMHUVNRJHRORãNDLVWUDåLYDQMD6XERWLFD%LMHOMLQD*UDÿHYLQVNL
IDNXOWHW7HKQLþNLLQVWLWXW.
ĈXULü1D=QDþDMJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåLYDQMD]DSRVWURMHQMHRGVXPSRUDYDQMDGLPQLKJDVRYD
Termoelektrane Ugljevik. XVI .RQJUHVJHRORJD6UELMHVDPHÿXQDURGQLPXþHãüHP'RQML
Milanovac, Srbija, str. 619-623.
ĈXULü1E0DLQFKDUDFWHULVWLFRIWhe terrain on the installation site for flue gas
desulphurisation of Ugljevik 1, Thermal Power plant. 4. symposium Macedonian association
for geotechnics MAG. Struga. pp. 177-184.
ĈXULü1ĈXUDQ3F2GUHÿLYDQMHSULWLVQHþYUVWRüHPHNLKVWLMHQDQDlokaciji Postrojenja za
odsumporavanje dimnih gasova Termoelektrane Ugljevik 1. Društvo za geotehniku Bosne i
Hercegovine, “Geoexpo 2014”. Mostar. Zbornik radova pp. 67-75.
(XURFRGH*HRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMD- dio I, EN 1997 – 1 i EN 1997-2:2006.
Eurocode 7. Geotechnical desing – Part 2: Desing assisted by laboratory testing, and Part 3: Desing
assisted by fieldtesting. European Commitete for standarization. Brussels. 1997.
0DNVLPRYLü00(2001): 0HKDQLNDWODGUXJRL]GDQMH%HRJUDGýLJRMDštampa.
0LWURYLü3(1997): 7HUHQNDRUDGQDVUHGLQD]DJUDÿHQMHInstitut za puteve Srbije, Beograd.
1DMGDQRYLü12EUDGRYLü5(1981): Mehanika tla u inženjerskoj praksi. Beograd: Rudarski institut.
Lokin P. (1990). Parametri i klasifikacije ispucalosti stenskih masa, Rudarsko-geološki fakultet,
Seminar "Metodologija istraživanja ispucalosti stenskih masa u geotehnici", Beograd.
Bosne i Hercegovine, “Geoexpo 2014”. Mostar. Zbornik radova pp. 67-75, 2014.
Yu H. S. A. (1998): Unified state parameter model for clay and sand, Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods
Geomech. 22(8), pp. 621-653.
155
UDK 624.131.5:519.87
A STOCHASTIC APPROACH FOR DYNAMIC

SOIL-PILE INTERACTION UNDER
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Liolios 1, K. Liolios 2, B. Folic 3 and G. Skodras 4

1 Democritus University of Thrace, Dept. Civil Engineering, Xanthi, Greece, e-
mail: aliolios@civil.duth.gr.
2
Institute of Information and Communication Technologies, Bulgarian Academy
of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria, e-mail: kostisliolios@gmail.gr.
3 University of Belgrade, Fac. of Mech. Enging, Belgrade, Serbia, e-mail:
boris.folic@gmail.com.
4
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Western
Macedonia, Kozani, Greece, e-mail: gskodras@uowm.gr.
ABSTRACT
The paper deals with a computational stochastic approach for the unilateral contact problem
of dynamic soil-pile interaction. Unilateral contact effects due to tensionless soil capacity,
soil elastoplastic-fracturing behaviour and gapping are strictly taken into account, as well as
environmental effects under uncertainty decreasing the soil resistance. The proposed
methodology concerns the treatment of both, the deterministic and the probabilistic problem.
The numerical approach concerning the deterministic problem is based on a double
discretization, in space by the Finite Element Method combined with Boundary Element
Method, and in time, and on nonconvex optimization. Uncertainties concerning the input
parameter values are treated by the Monte Carlo method in the probabilistic problem section.
Finally, the proposed methodology is applied for a practical case of dynamic soil-pile
interaction.
KEY WORDS. Dynamic soil-structure interaction, unilateral contact, environmental

degradation, numerical and stochastic geotechnical engineering.
INTRODUCTION
Uncertainty concerning input parameters in seismic soil-structure interaction is a crucial

problem in geotechnical engineering. As concerns the problem mathematical formulation of
the dynamic soil-pile interaction, this involves equalities as well as inequalities [1-3]. Indeed,
for the case of the general dynamic soil-structure interaction, see e.g. [1], the interaction
stresses in the transmitting interface between the structure and the soil are of compressive
156
type only. Moreover, due to in general nonlinear, elastoplastic, tensionless, fracturing etc.
soil behavior, gaps can be created between the soil and the structure. Thus, during strong
earthquakes, separation and uplift phenomena are often appeared, as the praxis has shown
[1,2,9-14].
Due to above inequality conditions, the pile-soil interaction can be considered as one of the
so-called inequality problems of structural and geotechnical engineering [4-7]. The
mathematical treatment of the so-formulated inequality problems can be obtained by the
variational or hemivariational inequality approach [4,5]. Numerical approaches for some
inequality problems of structural elastoplasticity and earthquake engineering have been also
presented, see e.g. [1,3-8].
In the present paper, a stochastic numerical approach for the inequality dynamic problem of
soil-pile interaction under uncertain input parameters is presented. Environmental
degradation for the soil and second-order geometric effects for the pile behaviour due to
preexisting compressive loads are taken into account. The proposed numerical approach
consists of solving first the deterministic problem and next the probabilistic problem. The
numerical method for the treatment of the deterministic problem is described in details in [1].
This approach is based on a double discretization and on methods of nonlinear programming.
So, in space the finite element method (FEM) coupled with the boundary element method
(BEM), and in time a step-by-step method for the treatment of convolutional conditions are
used. In each time-step a non-convex linear complementarity problem is solved with reduced
number of unknowns. The probabilistic numerical approach uses the Monte Carlo simulation
[15-18] for the treatment of uncertain input parameters. Finally, the presented procedure is
applied to an example problem of dynamic pile-soil interaction, and some concluding
remarks useful for the Civil Engineering praxis are discussed.
THE PROBABILISTIC COMPUTATIONAL APPROACH
The probabilistic approach for the dynamic soil-pile interaction can be obtained through
Monte Carlo simulations. As well-known, see e.g. [15-18], Monte Carlo simulation is simply
a repeated process of generating deterministic solutions to a given problem. Each solution
corresponds to a set of deterministic input values of the underlying random variables. A
statistical analysis of the so obtained simulated solutions is then performed. Thus the
computational methodology consists of solving first the deterministic problem for each set
of the random input variables and finally realizing a statistical analysis.
Details of the methodology concerning the deterministic problem and the probabilistic
aspects are given in the next sections.
Numerical Treatment of the Deterministic Problem
First, a discretization in space by combining the finite element method (FEM) with the
boundary element one (BEM) is used for the soil-pile system [1,2,5,9-14]. The pile is
discretized into frame-beam finite elements. Each pipeline node is considered as connected
157
to the associate soil nodes on both sides through two unilateral (interface) elements. Every
such u-element consists of an elastoplastic softening spring and a dashpot, connected in
parallel (see e.g. the Figure 1a), and appears a compressive force r(t) only at the time-
moments t when the pipeline node comes in contact with the corresponding soil node. Let
v(t) denote the relative retirement displacement between the soil-node and the pipe-node, g(t)
the existing gap and w g (t) the soil displacement induced by moving sources of the type
described in the Introduction. Then the piece-wise linearized unilateral contact behaviour of
the soil-pipeline interaction is expressed in the compact form of the following linear
complementarity conditions:
v+g+w g t 0, r t 0, r.(v+g+w g ) = 0. (1)
Further, the u-element compressive force is in convolutional form [2,13]
r = S(t)*y(t), y = w - ( g + v ), (2a,b)
or in form used in Foundation Analysis [14]
r = c s . (dy/dt) + p(y). (2c)
Here c s is the soil damping coefficient, w = w(t) the pile-node lateral displacement, y = y(t)
the shortening deformation of the soil-element, and p(y) the spring force. By * is denoted
the convolution operation. S(t) is the dynamic stiffness coefficient for the soil and can be
computed by the BEM [2]. Function p(y) is mathematically defined by the following, in
general nonconvex and nonmonotone constitutive relation:
p(y) C g P g (y), (2d)
where C g is Clarke's generalized gradient and P g ( ) the symbol of superpotential nonconvex

functions [4-5,8]. So, eq. (2d) expresses in general the elastoplastic-softening soil behaviour,
where unloading-reloading, gapping, degrading, fracturing etc. effects are included.
For the herein numerical treatment, p(y) is piece-wise linearized in terms of non-negative
multipliers as in plasticity [1,7]. So, the dynamic equilibrium conditions for the assembled
soil-pile system are written in matrix form as follows:
M ü(t) + C ú(t) + K u(t) = f(t) + AT r(t), (3)
h = BTr - H z - k, h d 0, z t 0, zT.h = 0. (4)
Here, eq. (3) is the dynamic matrix equilibrium condition and eqs. (4) include the unilateral
and the piece-wise linearized constitutive relations. Dots over symbols denote, as usually,
time-derivatives. M, C and K are the mass, damping and stiffness matrix, respectively; u, f
are the displacement and the force vectors, respectively; A, B are kinematic transformation
matrices; z, k are the nonnegative multiplier and the unilateral capacity vectors; and H is the
158
unilateral interaction square matrix, symmetric and positive semidefinite for the elastoplastic
soil case. But in the case of soil softening, some diagonal entries of H are nonpositive [7].
Finally, the force vector f includes the effects due to high-speed moving sources in the
surrounding soil along the pile-line.
Thus the so-formulated problem is to find (u,r,g,z) satisfying (1)-(4) when f and suitable
initial conditions are given.
Assuming that the unilateral quantities z and h include all local nonlinearities and unilateral
behaviour quantities, applying the central-difference time discretization, and after suitable
elimination of some unknowns, we arrive eventually at
hn = D zn + dn, z n t 0, h n d 0, z n T.h n = 0. (5)
Thus, at every time-moment t n QǻWZKHUHǻWLVWKHWLPHVWHSWKHSUREOHPRIUHOVLV

to be treated. This problem is a Non-Convex Linear Complementarity Problem (NCLCP),
can be treated as an hemivariational one and is solved by available methods and computer
codes of nonconvex optimization [1, 4-8]. So, in each time-VWHSǻWZHFRPSXWHZKLFKRIWKH
unilateral constraints are active and which are not. Due to soil softening, the matrix D is not
a strictly positive definite one in general. But as numerical experiments have shown, in most
civil engineering applications of soil-pile interaction this matrix is P-copositive, and thus the
existence of a solution is assured [7].
Numerical Treatment of the Probabilistic Problem
In order to calculate the random characteristics of the response of the considered soil-pile
system, the Monte Carlo simulation is used [15-17]. As mentioned, the·main element of a
Monte Carlo simulation procedure is the generation of random numbers from a specified
distribution. Systematic and efficient methods for generating such random numbers from
several common probability distributions are available. The random variable simulation is
implemented using the technique of Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) [18]. The LHS is a
selective sample technique by which, for a desirable accuracy level, the number of the sample
size is significantly smaller than the direct Monte Carlo simulation.
In more details, a set of values of the basic design input variables can be generated according
to their corresponding probability distributions by using statistical sampling techniques. The
generated basic design variables are treated as a sample of experimental observations and
used for the system deterministic analysis to obtain a simulated solution as in subsection 2.1.
is described. As the generation of the basic design variables is repeated, more simulated
solutions can be determined. Finally, statistical analysis of the simulated solutions is then
performed. The results obtained from the Monte Carlo simulation method depend on the
number of the generated basic design variables used.
159
NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
The steel IPB300 H-pile depicted in Figure 1(a) has a length L = 12 m and is fully embedded
into a clay deposit. The pile has a stiffness EI=52857 KN.m2, is fixed at the bottom and free
at the top. The effects of the over structural framing are approximated by a lumped mass 2
KN.m-1.sec2 and a rotational inertia 2 KN.m.sec2.
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 1: The numerical example: (a) The soil-pile system model, (b) Mean values of
maximum horizontal pile displacements, (c) Mean values of final soil-pile gaps.
160
(a) (b)
Figure 2: The numerical example: (a) Dynamic loading diagramme, (b) Diagramme (p-y) of
the soil behaviour.
The pile is subjected to a vertical constant top force V of 120 KN and to a dynamic horizontal
top force H(t) with the time history shown in Figure 2(a).
Denoting by x the axis along the pile-see Fig. 1(a)-the elastoplastic-softening soil behavior
according to eqs. (2) is shown in Figure 2(b)-diagramme (p-y)- where:
i. For the branch OA holds the exponential form p(x,y) = p p .[1-exp(-ay)],

where p p = b.[1-0.5exp(-cx)],
ii. For the branch AB holds p(x,y) = 0.75 p p . (-3ȟ2+2ȟ3)+p p , where ȟ = (y-
0.02)/0.06. For unloading-reloading paths the inclination is ap u .
In the above equations, the involved input parameters to be estimated are: a in units [m-1], b
in [kN/m2] and c in [m-1]. Based on experimental investigations and on in-situ results, the
lower and upper bound estimates for these uncertain parameters in the examined example are
as follows:
97D103, 360b390, 0.40c0.60 (6)
According to above values-ranges, the mean values are a m =100 m-1, b m =375 kN/m2 and
c m =0.5 m-1.
The developed numerical procedure is applied by using 200 Monte Carlo samples based on
eqs.(6). Some response results from the ones obtained are indicatively reported in Figure 1(b)
and 1(c). So, the mean values of the maximum pile horizontal displacements and of the final
gaps along the pipeline due to permanent soil deformations are shown in Figures 1(b) and
1(c), respectively.
161
CONCLUDING REMARKS
In the case of uncertain input parameters, the herein presented stochastic procedure provides
a numerical tool for the probabilistic soil-pile interaction dynamic analysis. The
representative results of the numerical example show that unilateral contact effects due to
tensionless soil capacity, reduced by environmental effects, and due to gapping, may be
significant and have to be taken into account for the dynamic soil-pile interaction. So the
herein presented stochastic procedure can be useful in the geotechnical praxis for the
earthquake resistant construction, design and control of piles.
REFERENCES
1. Liolios, A., Folic B. and K. Liolios. (2012). “Dynamic pile-soil interaction under
environmental effects: A linear complementarity numerical approach”, in: Mladenov, K. et al
(eds), Proceedings of International Jubilee Conference UACEG2012: Science & Practice,
University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, 15-17 November 2012, Sofia,
Bulgaria.
2. Wolf, J.P. (1988). “Soil-Structure-Interaction Analysis in Time Domain”, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
3. Liolios, A.A. (1989). “A numerical approach to the dynamic nonconvex unilateral problem of
soil-pile interaction”. In: C.M. Dafermos, G. Ladas & G. Papanicolaou (eds.), Differential
equations, pp. 437-443. Marcel Dekker, Inc., Basel.
4. Panagiotopoulos, P.D. (1993). “Hemivariational Inequalities in Engineering and Applications”,
Springer Verlag, Berlin.
5. Antes, H. & Panagiotopoulos, P.D. (1992). “The Boundary Integral Approach to Static and
Dynamic Contact Problems. Equality and Inequality Methods”, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel,
Boston, Berlin.
6. Liolios A. (2000). “A linear complementarity approach for the non-convex seismic frictional
interaction between adjacent structures under instabilizing effects”, Journal of Global
Optimization, Vol. 17, pp. 259-266.
7. Maier, G. (1971). “Incremental Elastoplastic Analysis in the Presence of Large Displacements
and Physical Instabilizing Effects”, Int. Jnl Solids and Structures, Vol. 7, 345-372.
8. Stavroulaki, M.E. & Stavroulakis, G.E. (2002), Unilateral contact applications using FEM
software. Int. Jnl Appl. Mathem. & Comp. Sciences.
9. Milev, N. (2016), Soil-structure interaction, PhD Thesis, UACEG, Sofia,(in Bulgarian).
10. Folic B., Ladjinovic, G., Folic R., Cosic, M. (2016). .Pile-soil-pile interaction in designing the
foundation of RC structures. pp. 379- 386, In: Folic R. (Ed), Proceedings of 5th International
Conference “Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology”. Sremski Karlovci, Serbia,
29-30 June 2016.
11. Kazakov, K., Stoynova I., Matuski, V. & Handruleva, A., (2016). “On the computational
dynamic soil-structure interaction (SSI) concepts in time-domain”. In: Folic R. (Ed),
Proceedings of 5th International Conference “Earthquake Engineering and Engineering
Seismology”. Sremski Karlovci, Serbia, 29-30 June 2016, pp. 371-378.
12. Liolios A., Liolios K. and Michaltsos G. (2013). “A numerical approach to the non-convex
dynamic problem of steel pile-soil interaction under environmental and second-order geometric
effects”. Lecture Notes in Applied and Computational Mechanics, vol. 56, pp. 369-375.
162
13. Liolios, A. & Pitilakis, K. & Savidis, S. & Yeroyianni, M. (1988). “A convolutional numerical
approach to the unilateral contact problem of seismic soil-pipeline interaction”. In: Bisch, P. &
Labbe, P. & Pecker, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 11-th European Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Abstract Vol., p.420. Paris, France, 6-11 Sept. 1998. Rotterdam: Balkema, (1998).
14. Scott, R. (1981). “Foundation Analysis”, Prentice-Hall, London
15. Ang, A. H., & Tang, W. H. (1984). “Probability concepts in engineering planning and design,
vol. 2: Decision, risk, and reliability”. New York: Wiley.
16. Kottegoda, N., & Rosso, R. (2000). “Statistics, probability and reliability for civil and
environmental engineers”. McGraw-Hill, London.
17. Dimov, I. T. (2008). “Monte Carlo methods for applied scientists”. World Scientific.
18. Papadrakakis, M., & Stefanou, G. (Eds.). (2014). Multiscale modeling and uncertainty
quantification of materials and structures. Springer.
163
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131:519.87
IMPORTANCE OF NUMERICAL SIMULATION

OF SOIL MEDIA IN SSI ANALYSIS OF FRAMES
Kemal Edip, Vlatko Sesov, Julijana Bojadjieva,

Toni Kitanovski, Jordanka Chaneva, Dejan Ivanovski,
Irena Gjorgjeska
Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology,
University "Ss. Cyril and Methodius", Skopje, R. North Macedonia,
gj_irena@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
ABSTRACT
In this work seismic interaction of soil-structure, the soil medium is usually taken into account
as a wide region in which constitutive relations are usually considered to be elastic. Only in
domain of small deformation the linear soil modeling reveals initially real simulation of the
soil phenomena. As deformations increase, linear modeling of soil shows significant
difference in results. Thus, nonlinear material modeling of soil should be used considering
the fact that small soil deformations are characteristic only in low seismic excitation and are
not important in the seismic analysis of soil structure interaction phenomena. In this paper
the response of multi storey frame structures using three material models is analyzed. The
results from performed analysis show that besides the structural properties and side
boundaries, the choice of soil constitutive relations plays an important role in problems
related to soil structure interaction problems
KEY WORDS: Soil structure interaction, Numerical simulation, infinite elements
=1$ý$-180(5,ý.(6,08/$&,-(7/$866,
ANALIZI RAMOVA
APSTRAKTAN
8RYRPUDGXVHL]PLþNDLQWHUDNFLMDWOo-konstrukcija, tlo RELþQRVHX]LPDXRE]LUNDRãLURND
REODVW X NRMRM VH NRQVWLWXWLYQL RGQRVL RELþQR VPDWUDMX HODVWLþQRP 6DPR X GRPHQX PDOLK
deformacija OLQHDUQRPRGHOLUDQMHWODRWNULYDXSRþHWNXUHDOQXVLPXODFLMXIHQRPHQDWOD.DNR
VHGHIRUPDFLMHSRYHüDYDMXOLQHDUQRPRGHOLUDQMHWODSRND]XMH]QDþDMQXUD]OLNXXUH]XOWDWLPD
6WRJD EL WUHEDOR NRULVWLWL QHOLQHDUQR PRGHOLUDQMH WOD V RE]LURP QD þLQMHQLFX GD VX male
GHIRUPDFLMHWODNDUDNWHULVWLþQHVDPRNRGVODEHVHL]PLþNHSREXGHLQLVXYDåQHXVHL]PLþNRM
analizi fenomena interakcije konstrukcija-tlo. U ovom radu analizira se odgovor višespratnih
ramova SRPRüX WUL PRGHOD PDWHULMDOD 5H]XOWDWL L]YHGHQH DQDOL]H SRNDzuju da pored
VWUXNWXUQLKVYRMVWDYDLERþQLKJUDQLFDL]ERURGQRVDNRQVWLWXWLYQLK]HPOMLãWDLJUDYDåQXXORJX
u problemima koji se odnose na probleme interakcije konstrukcija-tlo.
KLJ8ý1(5(ý,LQWHUDNFLMDVWUXNWXUHWODQXPHULþNDVLPXODFLMDEHVNRQDþQLHOHPHQWL
164
INTRODUCTION
The constitutive modeling of soil media has been an important topic in the field of soil
structure interaction. In the past decades many attempts have been performed to develop
constitutive models for modeling of soil media. Two major classes are available in the
literature: linear elastic models and non linear elastic model in which stress strain relations
deviate from linearity. It is of special attention to deal also with failure envelope where its
description plays a crucial role in soil simulation. The aim of this study is to present the newly
implemented material models in finite element software ANSYS for simulation of soil
medium in soil-structure interaction problems. Although in numerical calculations
constitutive models are the most difficult and tricky part of the problem, there are some
elementary features of the soil behavior which should be taken into consideration in most
cases. The constitutive models are usually classified with respect to their mathematical
parameters. For more detailed explanation the reader can refer to the following publications
[1, 2]. Although the classification of the material models is useful for scientists it is still
difficult for comprehension to the wider professional public. Therefore, model evaluation
appears more useful for users of constitutive models in geotechnical engineering. Laboratory
experiments of soil specimens are used for testing of constitutive models and checking for
some basic soil features such as nonlinearity, irreversibility, failure criteria, deformation
history etc.
As given in the work of Herle [3] it is quite impossible to consider all features by using only
single material model. In the work of Chi and Kuchwaha [4] a non linear finite element model
has been developed to study the soil failure by using the hyperbolic stress strain model.
Experiments conducted by Rowe and Peaker [5] show that both deformation mode and
magnitude affect the distribution of earth pressure. Building upon the pioneering works of
Drucker and Prager [6] on soil plasticity the trend has been to develop more precise and
correct elastoplastic models for simulation of real materials. In the work of Loret and Prevost
[7] different parameters are considered in solutions for the Drucker-Prager elasto plastic
material models. On the other hand development of von Mises [8] elastic plastic equations
has enabled considerable improvement in simulation of soil materials. The variation in
structural response for acceleration, displacements and structural moemnts are tabular
presented and comparisons are made accordingly.
MODELLING OF SOIL MEDIUM
In the finite element context of integration of material models, the constitutive equations are
carried out at integration points. The incremental analysis is done and the solution is assumed
to be known at the start of the increments. Knowing the strain iQFUHPHQW¨İLWLVSRVVLEOHWR
calculate the stress at the end of the increment. In general the integration of the elasto-plastic
models presents a challenging numerical problem since the plastic strain is defined as a rate
after the material behavior has changed at the yield point.
In this work in numerical modeling the soil in the soil structure interaction problem is
modeled as a non linear medium using the Drucker-Prager and Bilinear Isotropic (BISO)
material models. In order to complete the investigation an elastic model of soil is also
simulated for completeness of the comparison.
165
The frame structure is exposed to earthquake acceleration and the results compared
accordingly. Then the non linear material models are compared with elastic soil medium and
the results are discussed consequently. For more detailed explanation of the material models
the reader is referred to [7, 9]. The calibration of the non linear material models for Bilinear
and Drucker-Prager material laws is done according to the work of Kodama and Komiyo
[10].
The Biliniear Isotropic material model (BISO) uses the von Mises yield criteria coupled with
an isotropic work hardening assumption. The material behaviour is described by a bilinear
stress-strain curve starting at the origin with positive stress and strain values. The initial slope
of the curve is taken as the elastic modulus of the material. At the specified yield stress the
curve continues along the second slope defined by the tangent modulus. The tangent modulus
cannot be less than zero nor greater than the elastic modulus [11].
On the other hand the Drucker-Prager model uses the outer cone approximation to the Mohr-
Coulomb law. The amount of dilatancy can be controlled with the dilatancy angle. If the
dilatancy angle is equal to the friction angle, the flow rule is associative [11].
The soil medium is presented as a two dimensional model composed of four layers resting
on bedrock. In Table 1 the soil layers properties are tabulated in a way that the bottom layers
are characterized with better soil characteristics.
Table 1. Material parameters in finite element analysis

Soil Layer Thickness Density Elastic Friction Uniaxial
medium number (m) (kg/m3) Modulus angle yield stress
(kPa) (deg) (kPa)
Elastic 1 3 1.1 2000
2 7 1.3 2200
3 6 1.5 2400
4 14 2 2600
Drucker- 1 3 1.1 2000 35
Prager 2 7 1.3 2200 35
3 6 1.5 2400 35
4 14 2 2600 35
Von 1 3 1.1 2000 0.1
Mises 2 7 1.3 2200 0.1
3 6 1.5 2400 0.1
4 14 2 2600 0.1
The soil is discretized using eight nodded plane strain elements PLANE82. The dynamic
analysis is performed by transient analysis using the step by step method. The proportional
viscous damping matrix is taken to be proportional to mass and stiffness matrix (Rayleigh
damping). The Rayleigh damping factors, alpha and beta are calculated such that the critical
damping is 5% for first two modes. The bottom boundary of the soil model is fixed while
side boundaries are simulated as viscous boundaries
166
COUPLED SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION SYSTEM
In order to show the influence of the soil material modelling to the structural response a
comparison of three different cases has been performed. First the soil medium is simulated
as an elastic material model. Then the same soil medium is simulated as nonlinear by
considering the Drucker-Prager and BISO material models. In order to have a bigger range
of results the frame is considered as one, three and five storey frames. The frame structural
elements are idealized as two dimensional elastic beam elements BEAM3 having three
degrees of freedom at each node, translations in the nodal x and y directions and rotation
about the nodal z axis. The behaviour of the frame structure is supposed as elastic and is
modelled using two parameters, the modulus of elasticity E=3.15x107 kPa and Poisson’s
ration n=0.2. The bay length of the frame is taken to be 4.0 m and storey height of 3.0 m.
Section of beams is 40 x 50 cm while the column section is 50 x 50cm. A mass of 11 tons is
assigned on each node to simulate the real structural behaviour (total 44 tons per floor). For
all RC frames the beam and column sections, floor masses and number of bays are kept
constant in all cases. The only parameter that is altered is the storey number
Fig. 1. Coupled Soil structure system of a five storey frame
Finite element modelling of the coupled soil-structure system is performed by the software
ANSYS [11] as shown in Figure 2. The effect of soil-structure interaction is carried out with
the acceleration time history of the El Centro earthquake with a scaled peak ground
acceleration of 0.25g. The foundation where the structure is supported is taken to be 8 nodded
plane element having two degrees of freedom in each node, translations in the nodal x and y
directions. The moment transfer capability between the column and the footing is created by
using a constraint equation where the rotation of the beam is transferred as force couples to
the plane element. In Table 2 below the difference in the structural response is given.
167
Table 2. Structural values from the analysis of the frame structures

No. of Soil Max. Max. Max.
Storey Medium acceleration displacement moment
at top of Str. at top of Str. at top of Str.
(m/s²) (mm) (kNm)
Elastic 2.54 9.44 28.5
Drucker-
1 2.77 9.33 25.6
Prager
BISO 2.79 9.39 31.7
Elastic 2.60 4.89 2.02
Drucker-
3 2.60 4.08 4.03
Prager
BISO 2.68 4.66 4.40
Elastic 2.55 5.67 2.75
Drucker-
5 2.60 5.57 5.49
Prager
BISO 2.61 6.87 5.79
According to the acceleration values of the Table 2 the maximum acceleration at the top of
structure is considerably big when using linear elastic material model. This illustrates that in
soil medium analysis usage of elastic material model is not realistic and should be considered
carefully. On the other hand, in using Drucker-Prager material model the maximum structural
moment at top of structure has smaller values when compared with elastic material model.
In moment comparison the usage of BISO model has similar values with the Drucker-Prager
model although the deviation of the results is observed. When comparing the horizontal
displacement at the top of structures it can be stated that in all cases of frames considered the
Drucker-Prager model predicts the smallest values. In comparison of maximum acceleration
values at the top of structures it can be concluded that the elastic material model has the
smallest values while the usage of Drucker-Prager and BISO models vary accordingly. Thus
it can be stated that in simulation of soil medium by non linear material models the calibration
of the parameters with experimental results has to be performed previously.
CONCLUSIONS
It is to be stated that in the literature there are many examples where behavior of real
geotechnical structures are compared. Although, relatively little attention has been given to
effects of material modeling on the results from analysis. The major advantage of the
proposed model is that the description of the soil model is both linear and non-linear which
allows basic mechanical responses to be predicted in a correct manner. Moreover, all
parameters used in the model have explicit physical meanings and can be calibrated through
laboratory tests. On the other hand the main limitations of the model is that due to linear
effects the predictability using linear material model can cause over prediction of the critical
strength at high deformation values. The best algorithm of soil modeling is the one that
combines computational efficiency with acceptable accuracy. Since analytical solution is not
always available all elastoplastic models are implemented with some negligible error.
168
REFERENCES:
1. Darve, F., Incrementally non-linear constitutive relationships. Geomaterials, Constitutive

Equations and Modelling, 1990: p. 213-238.
2. Cambou, B. and C. Di Prisco, Constitutive modelling of geomaterials2000: Hermes Science
Publications.
3. Herle, I., „On basic features of constitutive models for geomaterials”. Journal of Theoretical and
Applied Mechanics, 2008. 38(1-2): p. 61-80.
4. Chi, L. and R. Kushwaha, A non-linear 3-D finite element analysis of soil failure with tillage
tools. Journal of Terramechanics, 1990. 27(4): p. 343-366.
5. Rowe, P. and K. Peaker, Passive earth pressure measurements. Geotechnique, 1965. 15(1): p. 57-
78.
6. Drucker--, D., W. Prager, and H. Greenberg, Extended limit design theorems for continuous
media. Quart. Appl. Math, 1952. 9(4): p. 381-389.
7. Loret, B. and J.H. Prevost, Accurate numerical solutions for Drucker---Prager elastic-plastic
models. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1986. 54(3): p. 259-277.
8. Krieg, R. and D. Krieg, Accuracies of numerical solution methods for the elastic-perfectly plastic
model. ASME, Transactions, Series J-Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 1977. 99: p. 510-
515.
9. Nyssen, C., An efficient and accurate iterative method, allowing large incremental steps, to solve
elasto-plastic problems. Computers & Structures, 1981. 13(1–3): p. 63-71.
10. Kodama, N. and K. Komiya, Model Experiment and Numerical Modelling of Dynamic Soil-
Structure Interaction, in Materials with Complex Behaviour, A. Öchsner, L.F.M. Silva, and H.
Altenbach, Editors. 2010, Springer Berlin Heidelberg. p. 269-276.
11. ANSYS. Fem Software. 2006.
169
6WUXþQLUDG
UDK 624.152
VREDNOVANJE I ANALIZA GRAĈEVINSKIH

JAMA ZA KOMPLEKS ZGRADA
SASTAVLJENIH OD NEKOLIKO BLOKOVA
Dejan Ivanovski, Toni Kitanovski, Jordanka Chaneva,

Vlatko Sheshov, Julijana Bojadjieva i Kemal Edip
UKIM-IZIIS, T. Aleksandrov, no. 165, Skopje, Republic of N. Macedonia,
ivanovski@iziis.ukim.edu.mk, tonik@iziis.ukim.edu.mk, dance@iziis.ukim.edu.mk,
vlatko@iziis.ukim.edu.mk, jule@iziis.ukim.edu.mk, kemal@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
REZIME
Ovaj se rad fokusira na procesu analize kompleksa zgrada, u kontekstu tehnickih aspekata i
njihov uticaj na tlo ispod temelja i stabilnost JUDÿHYLQVNH jame za dva razlicita scenarija,
razliþita u odnosu na vreme izvRÿHQMD blokova - kontinuirano ili odvojeno. Zaštita
JUDÿHYLQVNHjame je usvojena kao zid kontinuiranih kolova visine od 10,9m, sa 3 reda ankera.
Analiza je pravljena u softveru “Plaxis 2D”. Prikazana su dobijena sleganja u tlu i
horizontalna pomeravanja zastitnih potporni zidova, kao i dobijene sile u ankerima.
./-8ý1(5(ý,gradezna jama, potporna konstrukcija, sleganje, pomeravanje.
EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS OF

CONSTRUCTION PIT FOR COMPLEX BUILDING
CONSISTED OF SEVERAL BLOCKS
ABSTRACT
This paper focuses on analysis process of a multi – building complex, in terms of technical
aspects and its impact on sub-foundation ground and stability of the construction pit, for 2
different scenarios in terms of the timeline in the construction of the blocks – simultaneously
or separately. The designed support system represents a continuous pile wall with height of
up to 10.9m, with 3 rows of anchors. The analysis are executed using the licensed software
“Plaxis 2D”. Settlements in the ground and horizontal displacements of the support system,
as well as the obtained forces in the anchors are presented below.
KEYWORDS: construction; pit; settlement; displacement; support system

170
INTRODUCTION
The design of construction pit has been a challenge in the civil engineering practice. As given
in the work of Krajewski [1] the support of construction pits is usually designed by limiting
the deformations and using elastic/plastic models which are generally unsuitable. In the work
of Bilgin [2] the construction procedures are considered in numerical analysis which result
in significantly higher bending moments and wall deformations. As given in the work of
Potts [3] conventional design methods use the limit equilibrium approach to simulate the
behavior of construction pit. The adequate stability is ensured by introducing a factor of
safety. Although there have been many studies on behavior of pile walls for excavation pit,
unfortunately there is lack of studies dealing with differential settlements inside the
construction pit.
In this paper the analysed construction pit belong to a multi - building complex which is
consisted of 16 blocks for different purpose, like resident buildings, shopping mall, offices,
etc. All of them have 3 levels underground with foundation level of -12.0m from the ground
floor. The architectural project is prepared as a single communicating space between the
blocks. The electrical and mechanical components are working as a single system as well.
The location where this object is located is surrounded with other buildings and streets, so
for that purpose a vertical excavation is needed and temporary support system for the
construction pit is built. This paper is focused on the technical aspects of the construction
process and its impact on sub-foundation ground and stability of the construction pit.
For this purpose, the widest cross – section of the construction pit is chosen. This cross
section is has 3 blocks which are planned to be built either simultaneously of separetely. Two
scenarios are analysed, i.e. combinations of the timeline of constructing the blocks. The
analysis are done in Plaxis 2D [4] software program, and several parameters are observed in
order to conclude whether simultaneous construction of the three blocks is better than
separate construction of each block, from a technical point of view. For modelling the soil
different reports have been used [5-9].
DESCRIPTION OF THE ANALYSED MODEL AND SCENARIOS
The finite element method is employed to perform analysis with assumption of plane strain.
The analysed cross – section is the widest section of the construction pit, with width of 142
m, and height of 8.6 meters on the left side and 10.9 meters on the right side. The left side is
lower because there is an existing cantilever wall near the adjacent street and the construction
pit was designed almost from the bottom of it, due to economic reasons. The support system
(protection of the construction pit) for both sides in this cross section is designed as
continuous pile wall with varying total length, depending on the height of the pit with a 65cm
diameter of the piles and 3 rows of anchors with different lengths (Fig. 1).
171
Slika $QDOL]LUDQLSUHVMHNJUDÿHYLQVNHMame
Figure 1. The analyzed cross section of the construction pit
The loads from structures are calculated as an average stress on the ground from self-weight
load case. The presumed loads per floor are taken as 12 kN/m2 and 25 kN/m2 for the
foundation slab. Calculated this way, the obtained average loads per m2 are 85 kN/m2 for
block 1, 103 kN/m2 for block 2 and block 3. It is important to be noted that these are loads
only during the construction process, since the analysed scenarios are focused only during
the construction timeline (no live loads, additional loads etc). The surcharge loads taken in
the model with a value of 15 kN/m2 take into account the traffic loads from the adjacent
streets on both sides. The material characteristics of the soil layers are taken from a
geomechanical report (Table 1).
Tabela 1, GeomeKDQLþNHNDUDNWHULVWLNHWOD
Table 1. Geomechanical characteristics of soil
There are analysed 2 different scenarios in terms of the timeline of building the blocks:
172
x Scenario 1: Block 1 and block 2 are constructed simultaneously, while block 3 is

left to be built later.
x Scenario 2: All of the blocks are constructed in the same time (simultaneous
building).
Each scenario is analysed in 7 phases:

0. Zero (initial phase): The soil profile is modeled, the excavation has not started.
1. First phase: First layer of soil is excavated and first row of anchors is activated - the
highest one on the right side is activated.
2. Second phase: Second layer of soil is excavated and the first row of anchors on the
left side and the second row of anchors on the right side are activated.
3. Third phase: Third layer is excavated and the second row of anchors on the left side
and third row of anchors on the right side are activated.
4. Fourth phase: The excavation is completed to the foundation level, and the third row
of anchors on both sides are activated.
5. Fifth phase: It is assumed that the buildings will be built in phases, so half of the total
loads of the buildings are activated.
6. Sixth phase: It is assumed that half of the total loads of the buildings are activated and
support (fixed displacement) to the side boundaries is simulated.
7. Seventh phase: The buildings are completely built and the other half of the loads are
activated.
Particular attention is given to phases 4, 5 and 7 since these phases are controlling the
development of vertical displacements (settlements) of the buildings and the horizontal
displacements of the support system (protection pile wall).
ANALYSIS OF SETTLEMENTS
SCENARIO 1 - BLOCK 1 AND BLOCK 2 ARE CONSTRUCTED

SIMULTANEOUSLY
The model of this scenario and the obtained results from the numerical simulations are
presented below.
Slika 2. Model-prezentacija scenarija 1

Figure 2. Model presentation of scenario 1
173
Slika 3. Ukupno pomeravanje u y-pravcu - faza 4, s max =+4.09 cm

Figure 3. Total displacement in y-direction – phase 4, s max =+4.09 cm
Slika 4. Fazno pomeravanje u y-pravcu - faza 4, s min =-9.55 mm

Figure.4. Phase displacement in y-direction – phase 4, s min =-9.55 mm
Zone of highest
differential
Slika 5. Fazno pomeravanje u y-pravcu - faza 7, s min =-9.34mm

Figure 5. Phase displacement in y-direction – phase 7, s min =-9.34mm
174
Slika 6. Ukupno pomeravanje u x-pravcu, faza Slika 7. Ukupno pomeravanje u x-pravcu, faza
4, ux=4.25cm u kolova konstrukcija 7, ux=4.28cm u kolova konstrukcija
Figure.6. Total displacement in x-direction, Figure 7. Total displacement in x-direction,
phase 4, ux=4.25cm in the pile structure phase 7, ux=4.28cm in the pile structure
As can be seen from the figures above, in this scenario it is presumed that blocks 1 and 2 are
constructed in the same time, while block 3 is left to be constructed after the first two blocks
are completely built. It can be seen that in phase 4 i.e. when the excavation is completed
without any buildings, there is uplift of the ground of 4.09 cm, and it is the same in all
scenarios. The maximum obtained settlement in phase 7 is 18.90 mm (as a sum from phase
displacement in phase 4 and phase 7).
At this loading scenario, fixed displacement of the support system is placed only on the left
side, because on the right side there is no structure, which is one of the reasons why this case
is unfavourable. The support system on the right side could stay unsecured for a long time,
which is a problem because the lifetime of the temporary support systems are approximately
18-36 months. This is a problem especially in case of severe weather conditions, like heavy
rainfalls which can lower the strength parameters of the soil.
SCENARIO 2 – SIMULTANEOUS CONSTRUCTION OF THE BLOCKS
The model of this scenario deals with the structures built simultaneously. The obtained results
from the numerical simulations are presented below.
Slika 8. Model-prezentacija scenarija 2

Figure 8. Model presentation of scenario 2
175
Slika 9. Fazno pomeravanje u y-pravcu - faza 4,

Figure 9. Phase displacement in y-direction – phase 4, s min =-9.65 mm
Slika 10.
Figure 10. Phase displacement in y-direction – phase 7, s min =-9.42 mm
Slika 11. Slika 12.
Figure 11. Total displacement in x-direction, Figure 12. Total displacement in x-direction,
phase 5, ux=4.24cm in the pile structure phase 7, ux=5.06cm in the pile structure
176
The maximum settlement in this scenario is is 16.69mm, but it is almost equal in the whole
cross-section, so the differential settlement has negligible value, which is one of the reasons
this scenario is more favourable.
Furthermore, the construction of blocks 1 and 3 is simultaneous, the construction pit which
is treated as temporary system will be left ‘open’ for shorter period of time and the
constructed buildings will serve as horizontal support for the continuous pile wall (protection
system). This contributes toward overall stability of protection of construction pit.
COMPARISON OF THE FORCES IN ANCHORS
In order to compare the results of the forces in anchors next in Table 2 the obtained forces
in different levels of anchors are presented.
From the obtained results i.e. forces in anchors in different phases and different scenarios, it
can be concluded that when there is adjacent building, the forces in the anchors are generally
bigger than when the construction pit is empty. When there is pressure on the ground next to
the support system, it contributes to increase the settlements (vertical deformations) but also
the horizontal displacements in the protection pile wall are increased, as can also be seen
from the previous shown figures for the obtained horizontal displacements.
7DEHOD6LOHXUD]OLþLWLPQLYRLPDDQNHUɚ
Table 2. Forces in different levels of anchors
Forces in anchors [kN]

Row of anchors
Phase 7 - Phase 7 - with
Phase 5
unsuported adjacent building
I 193.3 193.9 211.7
II 220.6 221.5 243.6
III 242.3 243.5 268.8
Even though the forces in the anchors are larger when there is adjacent building, at the
moment when the building reach the ground level, there is no more need of the support
system, because in case of any incidental, excessive horizontal displacements, the pile wall
system will just lean to the already built building. It has big horizontal stiffness, so the
anchors are not anymore in function and the forces in them will relax, hence there is no risk
of any failure of them and overall of whole support system.
177
CONCLUSIONS
The problem has been simplified to give a meaningful study of the soil behavior. The soil
conditions have been shown as important factors influencing the overall stability. Earth
pressures, settlements, wall bending moments have been analysed using the finite element
method.
Based on the results from the numerical simulations presented in previous chapters, the
following conclusions can be drawn:
x The construction of all buildings (block 1, 2 and 3) simultaneously for all scenarios is
the most favorable case because the deferential settlements (as one of the key
parameters) are with a neglectable value, so there is no significant unfavorable effect
on performance of buildings. Most of the soil deformation will be uniform.
x The construction pit is constructed as continuous pile wall system supported by
anchors. From technical point of view this protection wall system is designed as
temporary one, to provide the safe construction activities until the buildings reach the
ground level. One of the main goals is that the construction process should be
continuous since any disruption will leave the construction pit open and exposed to
weather conditions for long time, which can be severe and lead to additional problems
like increasing the ground water table and lowering the soil strength parameters.
x Construction of buildings have also another positive impact on stability of protection
pile wall system because it will provide additional horizontal support once they reach
the ground level. So any incidental, excessive deformations of the temporary pile wall
system which has a lifetime of 18-36 months, can be carried by horizontal stiffness of
the already constructed building and prevent any further instabilities.
x Having the above given results and conclusions, it can be recommended that the
construction setup preferable be performed simultaneously since it contributes the
most to the uniformity of ground deformations and also to the overall stability of the
protection wall system of the construction pit.
REFERENCES
1. Bilgin, Ö., Numerical studies of anchored sheet pile wall behavior constructed in cut and fill
conditions. Computers and Geotechnics, 2010. 37(3): p. 399-407.
2. Brinkgreve, R. B. J., et al. "PLAXIS 2D 2019. Plaxis bv (2019)
3. Excavation support system geotechnical report for the Skopje Mixed Use Center Project, PRT-
DST-GEN-001, Prota Engineering, October 2017
4. Geomechanical investigations Report GM_092_08/13, “Report for the geotechnical investigations
for the Mixed Used Complex Skopje phase I”, GEING, Skopje July 2013
178
5. Geomechanical investigations Report GM_138_12/13, “Report for the geotechnical investigations

for the Mixed Used Complex Skopje phase II”, GEING, Skopje, July 2014
6. Krajewski, W., L. Edelmann, and R. Plamitzer, Ability and limits of numerical methods for the
design of deep construction pits. Computers and Geotechnics, 2001. 28(6): p. 425-444.
7. Main design project of the Skopje mixed used center Skopje, 2017.
8. Potts, D.M. and A.B. Fourie, The behaviour of a propped retaining wall: results of a numerical
experiment. Géotechnique, 1984. 34(3): p. 383-404
179
UDK 624.131.23
PARAMETRI SWRC I DISPERZIVNOSTI

LESNIH SEDIMENATA
Gordana Hadži-1LNRYLü .VHQLMDĈRNRYLü**
* Rudarsko-JHRORãNLIDNXOWHWĈXãLQD%HRJUDG
gordana.hadzinikovic@rgf.bg.ac.rs
** ,QVWLWXW,06%HRJUDG%XOHYDUYRMYRGH0LãLüD
e-mail:ksenija.djokovic@institutims.rs
REZIME
U radu je analizirana PRJXüQRVWXVSRVWDYOMDQMDzavisnost L]PHÿX disperzivnosti i parametara
retenzione krive SWRC za lesne naslage Zemunskog platoa. Retenzione SWRC krive
RGUHÿHQHVXeksperimentalno, dreniranjem uzoraka pod pritiskom u 15-barnom ekstraktoru,
prema ASTM standardima. Ispitivanja disperzivnosti vršena su metodom grudvice, metodom
dvostrukog hidrometrisanja i pin-hol opitom, prema BS i ASTM standardima. Ispitivanja su
izvedena na SULURGQLPLYHãWDþNLSULSUHPOMHQLP uzorcima lesnih sedimenata. Disperzivnost
OHVQLK VHGLHPHQDWD SRYHüDYD VH VD SRYHüDQMHP SULWLVND SURGLUDQMD YD]Guha (u a -u w ) b i
UH]LGXODQRJVWHSHQD]DVLüHQMDS rez , a opada sa smanjenjem koeficijenta O=ELMHQRVWXWLþHQD
SDUDPHWUHUHWHQ]LRQHNULYHDPDQMHXWLþHQDGLVSHU]LYQRVW
./-8ý1(5(ý,lesni sedimenti, retenziona kriva, disperzivnost, gustina, zbijanje.
PREDICTION OF DISPERSIBILITY FOR

UNSATURATED SOIL
ABSTRACT
The paper presents the possibility of establish the relationship between dispersibility and the
SWRC retention curve parameters for loess deposits of the Zemun Plateau. Soil water
retention curves, SWRCs, were determined experimentally, by means draining samples of
soil in pressure-plate 15-bar extractor according to ASTM. Soil dispersibility was determined
by means of the double hydrometer test, crumb test and pinhole test according to BS and
ASTM. The tests were carried out on natural and DUWL¿FLDOO\SUHSDUHGVDPSOHVZLWKGLơerent
degree of compaction. Soil dispersibility increased with increasing soil entry values (u a -u w ) b
and the residual degree of saturation S res , and decreased with decreasing coeƥFLHQWȜ6RLO
compaction appears to have a greater eơect on SWRC parameters than on soil dispersibility.
KEY WORDS: loess soil, soil-water retention curve, dispersibility, density, compaction.
180
UVOD
3UHPD JHRORãNRM JUDÿL L KLGURJHRORãNLP VYRMVWYLPD WHUHQD NDR L VWHSHQX ]DVLüHQMD Sr,
VHGLPHQWL =HPXQVNRJ OHVQRJ SODWRD VX X QH]DVLüHQRP VWDQMX (Hadži-1LNRYLü 2005). Kao
QH]DVLüHQLRYLVHGLPHQWLLPDMXPDWULþQXVXNFLMXu a -u w ) i novijim istraživanjima ispitivana
MH SURPHQD PDWULþQH VXNFLMH VD SURPHQRP YODåQRVWL w, uspostavljanjem konstitutivnih
]DYLVQRVWLVWHSHQ]DVLüHQMD– PDWULþQDVXNFLMDWMRGUHÿLYDQMHPNDUDNWHULVWLþQLKUHWHQ]LRQLK
krivih – 6:5& 2GUHÿLYDQMH RYLK ]DYLVQRVWL MH ]QDþDMQR L ]ERJ WRJD ãWR VH YUOR þHVWR X
SUDNVLþYUVWRüDQH]DVLüHQRJWODRGUHÿXMHQDRVQRYX6:5&LHIHNWLYQLKparametara þYUVWRüH
( Fredlund & Rahardjo, 1993).
Osim na promenu vlažnosti, lesni sedimenti mogu da budu osetljivi i na filtraciju vode u njima.
Usled filtracije vode površinske ili podzemne, uticaja atmosferskih padavina ili procurivanja
iz vodovodno-kanalizacionog sistema, kao posledica slabljenja strukturnih veza i odvajanja
SRMHGLQLKþHVWLFDL]strukture tla, XOHVQLPVHGLPHQWLPDPRåHGRüLGRSRMDYHXQXWUDãQMHHUR]LMH
LGLVSHU]LYQRVWL'LVSHU]LYQRVWQDVWDMHNDRSRVOHGLFDIL]LþNR-hemijskih promena usled protoka
vode kroz tlo, kada pod uticajem vode i strujanja SUL KLGUDXOLþNLP JUDGLMHQWLPD GROD]L do
VWUXNWXUQLKSURPHQDWMRGYDMDQMDLGHIORNXOLVDQMDþHVWLFDLVODEOMHQMDLQWHUJUDQXODUQLKYH]D
(Sherard i sar.,1976).
Prema (Mingbin i sar.,2009) XWYUÿHQDMH]DYLVQRVWL]PHÿXGLVSHU]LYQRVWLLSDUDPHWDUD6:5&

SR &DPSEHOOX 6OHGHüL RYDM NRQFHSW X UDGX MH DQDOL]LUDQD PRJXüQRVW XVSRVWDYOMDQMD
]DYLVQRVWLL]PHÿXSDUDPHWDUDUHWHQ]LRQHNULYH6:5&NDRRVQRYQHNRQVWLWXWLYQH]DYLVQRVWL
QH]DVLüHQRJWODLGLVperzivnosti za lesne naslage Zemunskog platoa. Kako se disperzivnosti
zasniva na kvalitativnim pokazateljima RGUHÿLYDQMHNODVHGLVSHU]LYQRVWLQLMHELORPRJXüH
XVSRVWDYLWLNRQNUHWQHHPSLULMVNHMHGQDþLQHYHüMH]DYLVQRVWL]UDåHQDSRVUHGQR.
8FLOMXSRYHüDQMDVWDELOQRVWLOHVQRJWODQDNRPHVHJUDGHREMHNWLþHVWRVHSUHJUDÿHQMDYUãL
]ELMDQMHWHPHOMQRJWOD,VWRWDNR]ERJYHOLNHUDVSURVWUDQMHQRVWLOHVQRWORVHþHVWRNRULVWLNDR
PDWHULMDONRMLVHXJUDÿXMHXQDVLSH=ERJWRJDVXUHWHQ]LRQHNULYHLGLVSHU]LYQRVWRGUHÿLYDQLL
za prirodne i za YHãWDþNLSULSUHPOMHQHX]RUNHOHVQRJWOD (U d max i w opt dobijeni Proktorovim
opitom).
ISPITIVANI MATERIJAL I METODE ISTRAŽIVANJA
Zbog izuzetne osetljivosti lesnih naslaga, uzorci tla su uzimani iz istražnih jama,
metodom blok uzorka. U pogledu granulometrijskog sastava, lesni glinovito-prašinasti
sedimenti, &, VDGUåH § SUDãLQDVWH IUDNFLMH -PP L § glinovite frakcije
<0.002mm. 8SRJOHGXID]QRJVDVWDYDVDGUåDMSRUDXXNXSQRM]DSUHPLQLOHVDNUHüHVH-
YHüL MH SURFHQDW YD]GXKRP LVSXQMHQLKSRUDRNR GRN MH YRGRP LVSXQMHQRRNR
SRUD 6DGUåDM þYUVWLK þHVWLFD SRVWHSHQR VH SRYHüDYD VD GXELQRP 9ODåQRVW WOD X
prirodnom stanju je w=15-DVWHSHQ]DVLüHQMDMHSURPHQOMLYLL]QRVL6 r =45% to 55%
(Hadži-1LNRYLü ĈRNRYLü .
181
Suva gustina je u rasponu od 1.5-1.7 Mg/m3. Prema USCS klasifikaciji, ovi sedimenti
SUHGVWDYOMDMXJOLQHQLVNHGRVUHGQMHSODVWLþQRVWL&/- CI/CL, sDJUDQLFRPWHþHQMDLL =30-
JUDQLFRP SODVWLþQRVWL PL=17- LQGHNVRP SODVWLþQRVWL PI=16-18% i koloidne
aktivnosti K p >1.25.
2VLP QD X]RUFLPD X SULURGQRP VWDQMX YODåQRVWL LVSLWLYDQMD VX YUãHQD L QD YHãWDþNL
SULSUHPOMHQLP X]RUFLPD 3DUDPHWUL ]ELMHQRVWL ]D YHãWDþNL SULSUHPOMHQH X]RUNH RSWLPDOQD
vlažnost w opt i maksimalna suva gustina tla U dmax RGUHÿHQL su iz Proktorovog opita. Parametri
]ELMHQRVWL]DYHãWDþNLSULSUHPOMHQHX]RUNHVXw opt =17.6% i U dmax =1.726 Mg/m3
5HWHQ]LRQH 6:5& NULYH GRELMHQH VX HNVSHULPHQWDOQR GUHQLUDQMHP ]DVLüHQLK X]RUDND

SULURGQRYODåQRJLRSWLPDOQRYODåQRJWODSRGUD]OLþLWLPSULtiscima, u 15 barnom ekstraktoru,
prema standardima ASTM D 2325-68 i ASTM D: 3152-72 .
=DLVSLWLYDQMHGLVSHU]LYQRVWLWODSULPHQMHQLVXVOHGHüLRSLWL
- Opit grudvice, prema standardima ASTM D6572-06 i BS 1377-5:1990
- Opit dvostrukog hidrometrisanja SCS, prema standardu ASTM D4221-99;
- Pinhole opit – prema standardu ASTM D4647-93.
REZULTATI ISTRAŽIVANJA
Retenzione krive SWRC dobijene dreniranjem uzoraka u pressure plate aparatu prikazane su
na dijagramima na slici 1. Zavisnosti HIHNWLYQRJ VWHSHQD ]DVLüHQMD RG PDWULþQH VXNFLMH ]D
uzorak u stanju prirodne vlažnosti, prikazana je na slici 1, a za optimalno vlažni uzorak na
slici 2.
Slika 1. Retenziona SWRC kriva glinovito-prašinastog lesa za prirodno vlažni uzorak

Figure 1. SWRC of natural clayey-silty loess soil
Pritisak prodiranja vazduha za prirodno vlažne uzorke glinovito-prašinastog lesa iznosi (u a -

u w ) b =25-39 kPa, a rezidualni stepen zasiüHQMDod S rez = 0.45-0.58. Indeks raspodele pora, O
MHREUQXWRSURSRUFLRQDODQSODVWLþQRVWLWODLNUHüHVHRGO=0.26-0.50.
182
5H]LGXDOQL VWHSHQ ]DVLüHQMD i pritisci prodiranja vazduha SRYHüDYDju VH VD SRYHüDQMHP
]ELMHQRVWLLSRYHüDQMHPVXYHJXVWLQHWOD]DRSWLPDOQRYODåQHX]RUNHVDQDMYHüRPVXYRP
gustinom, S rez = 0.70-0.80, pritisci prodiranja vazduha (u a -u w ) b =40 do 50 kPa. Koeficijenti O
VHSRYHüDYDMXVDSRYHüDQMHPVDGUåDMD]UQD!PP=DRSWLPDOQRYODåQHX]RUNHJOLQRYLWR-
prašinastog lesa koeficijent O=0.20-0.30.
Slika 2. Retenziona SWRC kriva glinovito-prašinastog lesa za optimalno vlažni uzorak

Figure 2. SWRC of compacted optimally wet clayey-silty loess soil
Rezultati ispitivanja disperzivnosti prikazani su na slici 3 i u tabeli 1.
Slika 3. Rezultati ispitivanja disperzivnosti dvostrukim hidrometrisanjem

Figure 3. Results of the soil dispersibility testing using double hydrometer test
Dijagram opita dvostrukog hidrometrisanja glinovito-prašinastog lesa, na slici 3, pokazije da

je tlo disperzivno. Procenat disperzivnosti PD prema BS iznosi PD=57%, a prema ASTM
PD=69% ĈRNRYLü.
U tabeli 1 prikazan je rezultat ispitivanja opitom grudvice, uzorka potopljenog u 0.001M
NaOH, koji pokazuje da je tlo visoko disperzivno, klasifikovano u klasu HD ĈRNRYLü
2016).
183
Tabela 1. Rezultati ispitivanja disperzivnosti opitom grudvice

Table 1. Results of the soil dispersion testing using the crumb test
Metod Vreme (min, h)
a 2 min 20 min 1h 4h 6h 24 h
Rastvor 0.001 M NaOH
BS 1377-5:1990 it.6.3
Klasa
disperz HD HD HD HD HD HD
ivnosti
Uzorak
Rezultati ispitivanja pin-hol opitom uzoraka pokazali su da je tlo u prirodnom stanju vlažnosti
(prirodno zbijeno tlo) disperzivno - klase D2, dok je optimalno vlažno tlo (stepena zbijenosti
100%) klasifikovano kao nedisperzivno - klase ND3 ĈRNRYLü.
ZAKLJUýAK
Za lesne sedimente Zemunskog platoa, pritisak prodiranja vazduha (u a -u w ) b , i rezidualni

VWHSHQ]DVLüHQMDS rez VPDQMXMXVHVDSRYHüDQMHPVDGUåDMDþHVWLFD!PPDSRYHüDYDMX
VD SRYHüDQMHP VDGUåDMD JOLQHQLK PLQHUDOD L SODVWLþQRãþX WOD Koeficijent O obrnuto je
SURSRUFLRQDODQSODVWLþQRVWLWODLSRYHüDYDVHVDSRYHüDQMHPVDGUåDMDþHVWLFD!PP
Disperzivnost lesnih sedimenata Zemunskog platoa zavisi od njihovog hemijskog i

mineralnog, ali i granulometrijskog sastava. U prirodnom stanju vlažnosti svrstavaju se u
GLVSHU]LYQD WOD VD 3' § -70%. Disperzivnost opDGD VD SRYHüDQMHP VDGUåDMD þHVWLFD
>0.06mm. U prirodnom stanju zbijenosti, glinovito-prašinasti les klasifikuje se kao
disperzivni, za stepen zbijenosti 100% klasifikuje se kao nedisperzivni.
Rezultati ispitivanja pokazali su da se može uspostaviti posredQDYH]DL]PHÿXGLVSHU]LYQRVWL

i parametara retenzione krive QH]DVLüHQLKOHVQLKVHGLPHQDWD Disperzivnost lesnih naslaga u
SLURGQRPVWDQMXYODåQRVWLSRYHüDYD se VHVDSRYHüDQMHPSULWLVNDSURGLUDQMDYD]GXKDu a -
u w ) b L UH]LGXODQRJ VWHSHQD ]DVLüHQMD S rez , D RSDGD VD SRYHüDQMHP NRHILFLMHQWD O.
Disperzivnost lesnog tla u optimalnom stanju vlažnosti smanjuje se u odnosu na
disperzivnost tla u prirodnom stanju vlažnosti, EH]RE]LUDQDSRYHüDQMHSULWLVNDSURGLUDQMD
vazduha L UH]LGXDOQRJ VWHSHQD ]DVLüHQMD Za uzorke lesnog tla Zemunskog platoa
NODVLILNRYDQHNDRGLVSHU]LYQHSRVYLPPHWRGDPDSULWLVDNSURGLUDQMDYD]GXKDYHüLMHRG
kPa, a koeficijent O manji je od 0.50.
184
Zahvalnica
U radu su prikazani rezultati koji su deo istraživanja na projektu TR 36014 – *HRWHKQLþNL
DVSHNWL LVWUDåLYDQMD L UD]YRMD VDYUHPHQLK WHKQRORJLMD JUDÿHQMD L VDQDFLMD GHSRQLMD
komunalnog otpada, koje finansira Ministarsvo prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja
Republike Srbije.
LITERATURA:
ASTM D 2325-68: Standard Test Method for Capillary-Moisture Relationships for Coarse- and
Medium Textured Soils by Porous-Plate Apparatus; ASTM D: 3152-72, Standard Test
Method for Capillary-Moisture Relationships for Fine-Textured Soils by Pressure-
Membrane Apparatus.
ASTM Standard D 6572-06: Standard Test Methods for Determining Dispersive Characteristics of
clayey Soils by Crumb Test, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 04.08. 2006.
ASTM Standard D 4221-99: Standard Test Methods for Determining Dispersive Characteristics of
Clay Soils by Double Hydrometer, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 04.08. 1999.
ASTM Standard D 4647-93:Standard Test Methods for Identification and Classification of Dispersive
Clay Soils by the Pinehole Test, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 04.08. 1998.
British Standard (1990) BS 1377-5:, Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes – Part
5: Compressibility, permeability and durability tests; It. 6 Determination of dispersibility,
15–19. 1990.
Fredlund D. G., Rahardjo H.: Soil mechanics for unsaturated soil, NewYork, Wiley & Sons, (1993)
521 pp.
Hadži-Nikoviü G.: (2005) Constitutive relationships of unsaturated soils in Belgrade’s terrain, PhD
dissertation, Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, 247 pp.
Hadži-1LNRYLü*ĈRNRYLF.Water retention parameters and sediment dispersivity of the Zemun
Loess Plateau (Belgrade, Serbia), Comptes rendus de l’Académie bulgare des Sciences,
Tome 72, No 7, 2019 DOI:10.7546/CRABS.2019.07.11, 2019, pp. 931-938.
Mingbin H., D. G. Fredlund, M. D. Fredlund (2009) Estimation of SWCCs from Grain Size
Distribution Curves for Loess Soils in China, Geo Alifax.
Sherard J. L., L. P. Dunnigan, R. S. Decker, E. F. Steele: Pinhole Test for Identifying Dispersive
Soils, ASCE Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 102, No. GT1, 1976.,
pp.69–85.
Sherard J. L., R. S. Decker, L. P. Dunnigan: Identification and Nature of Dispersive Soils, ASCE
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 102, No. GT4, 1976. pp.287–301.
DjokovLü K. (2016) Geomechanical properties of erodible and dispersive fine-grained soils, PhD
Thesis, Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, 272 pp.
185
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.3
ADVANTAGES OF USING INTEGRATED

GEOPHYSICAL APPROCH TO SITE
CHARACTERIZATION
Irena Gjorgjeska, Vlatko Sesov, Kemal Edip
gj_irena@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
ABSTRACT
ȺQXPEHURIJHRSK\VLFDOWHFKQLTXHVKDYHEHHQGHYHORSHGDQGDGYDQFHGLQUHFHQW\HDUVLQ
order to increase the quality and accuracy of site characterization. The most practical and
effective way to perform in-situ measurements and processing using different seismic
methods as are seismic refraction, seismic reflection and MASW method are presented in this
paper. Each of the methods have some advantages and limitations, but their application in an
integrated approach provides higher accuracy subsurface modeling. The results of the
performed surveys at two characteristic locations in R. North Macedonia are presented to
show the efficiency of the combined methods approach.
KEY WORDS: site characterization, geophysical survey, integrated approach
PREDNOSTI KORIŠTENJA INTEGRISANOG

*(2),=,ý.2*35,6783$.$5$.7(5,=$&,-,
LOKACIJE
REZIME
3RVOHGQMLKJRGLQDMHUD]YLMHQLQDSUHGDQQL]JHRIL]LþNLKWHKQLNDXFLOMXSRYHüDQMDNYDOLWHWDL
WDþQRVWLNDUDNWHUL]DFLMHlokacije. U ovom radu su predstavljeni najprakWLþQLMLLQDMHILNDVQLML
QDþLQ]DREDYOMDQMHLQVLWXPHUHQMDLREUDGHNRULVWHüLVHL]PLþNHPHWRGHNDRãWRVXVHL]PLþND
UHIUDNFLMD VHL]PLþND UHIOHNVLMD L 0$69 PHWRGD 6YDND RG PHWRGD LPD QHNH SUHGQRVWL L
RJUDQLþHQMD DOL QMLKRYD SULPHQD QD LQWHJULVDQRP SULVWXSX RPRJXüDYD YHüX WDþQRVW
PRGHOLUDQMD SRGORJH 5H]XOWDWL L]YHGHQLK LVWUDåLYDQMD QD GYH NDUDNWHULVWLþQH ORNDFLMH X 5
Severnoj Makedoniji predstavljeni su da bi se pokazala efikasnost pristupa kombinovanim
metodama.
./-8ý1(5(ý,NDUDNWHUL]DFLMDORNDFLMH JHRIL]LþNRLVWUDåLYDQMHLQWHJULVDQLSULVWXS
INTRODUCTION
Surface seismic methods are non-invasive, cost and time effective, widely accepted
geophysical methods for near-surface characterization, based on seismic wave propagation
analysis.
186
They are classified into active and passive according to the seismic energy source type.
Active methods are usually used for near-surface characterization up to 100 m while passive
methods, which are based on analysis of long-periodic surface waves, are usually applied in
modeling of deep sedimentary basins. The mostly used active seismic methods are: seismic
refraction and reflection, MASW, REMI, etc. The most popular passive methods are the 2D
array methods such as: SPAC, frequency-wave number, etc., but most time and cost-effective
passive method is the single station microtremor HVSR method, which in combination with
active methods can be used for estimation of shear-wave velocities of deeper layers.
The main objective of this study is to show the advantages of using the integrated geophysical
approach to subsurface modeling. For this purpose, the results from the survey performed by
use of combined seismic methods at two characteristic locations in R. North Macedonia are
discussed.
The first location is situated in the urban area of Skopje. A survey by use of the methods of
seismic refraction, seismic reflection and MASW was performed, for evaluation of the local
soil conditions.
The seismic refraction survey is a fast and effective way of site characterization on the basis
of Vp and Vs variation in different materials. In situ refraction measurements are simple for
performance, especially when there is no presence of noise. For processing of seismic
refraction data, the tomographic approach is mostly used, which performs better in many
situations where traditional refraction technique fails, such as modeling of the subsurface
velocity structures with both lateral and vertical velocity gradients. The tomographic concept
is based on a gridded initial model for the iterative process, to determine the velocity of
individual 2-dimension grids within a profile as opposed to modeling the subsurface structure
as constant velocity layers so-called “cake layers”, and provides better resolution modeling
of complex subsurface structures (Tien-When, 2002). The limitation of this method is that it
cannot register seismic velocity inversion, i.e., trapped low velocity layers. But, using the
seismic refraction in combination with the MASW method complements these limitations.
The MASW method is based on the Rayleigh wave dispersive characteristics (Park, 1999).
The final result of the MASW surveys is 1DVs model or 2DVs map of the shear-wave
velocity variation in depth and laterally. In-situ 1D MASW measurements are simpler and
faster than refraction measurements due to the higher signal-to-noise ratio. The 2D roll-a-
long survey needs more effort and time to be performed, but the advantage of this technique
is that, by choosing optimal acquisition parameters, the data can be used for seismic reflection
processing, which results in very accurate, high resolution modeling of the subsurface
(Gjorgjeska, 2018a).
The second survey location is in Konsko, Gevgelija. The location is planned as a potential
quarry, whereat the rock mass of which the terrain is composed is to be used for construction
of a dam embankment. Seismic refraction survey was performed to define the thickness of
the surface crushed zones, i.e., parts of the location that are unfavorable for the anticipated
exploitation (Gjorgjeska 2018b, 2019).
187
1D MASW measurements were performed along the seismic refraction profiles, using the
same spread design and acquisition parameters.
In this study, the results from the survey along the Rp7 and Rp11 seismic profiles (Fig.1)
performed at the most critical part of the investigated location are discuss.
Fig. 1. Location map of the study area (red markers with coordinates). Up-left, the image of the
survey performance in Kurshumli An yard. Down-right, the investigated site with the conducted
seismic profiles at Konsko.
GEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The first investigated site is part of the Skopje depression formed during the Cenozoic
tectonic evolution. This evolution consisted of two periods of extension, the earlier in the
Paleogene period and the later in the Neogene. The last period of extensional deformation,
which is still going on, began in the early to middle Miocene. It is marked by deposition of
middle Miocene strata in the deepest basins.
The depression is filled with Neogene lacustrine sediments and alluvial deposits on the
surface with a maximum thickness of over 2,500 m. Their base is represented by old
Paleozoic crystalline shales, quartzite and marble. The transgressive basal conglomerate,
gravel and sandstone contain clasts from the underlying rock units. The Miocene formations
contain intermittent strata of gravel conglomerates, sandstone and siltstone, marl, marly
claystone, and upper sandstone and siltstone. The younger Pliocene formation consists of
cemented coarse-grained deposits, mainly gravel, gravelly sandstone, and sandstone. On the
top of the sedimentary sequence are found the most recent Quaternary sediments, mainly
alluvial deposits of gravel, sand and clay (Dumurdzanov, 2004).
188
According to the existing geological investigations, the terrain of the second investigated
ORFDWLRQLQ.RQVNR*HYJHOLMDLVFRPSRVHGRIJDEEURȣRI0HVR]RLFDJHFRYHUHGZLWK
diluvial material (d). The genesis of the site is associated with initial magmatism in the
Jurassic period during the formation of the Jurassic geosyncline when gabbro intrusions were
pushed through the old Triassic and Palaeozoic sediments.
Due to external atmospheric effects and as a result of tectonic processes, the gabbro upon the
surface is subjected to physical-mechanical disintegration giving rise to diluvial formations.
Also, the rocks that are present under the surface diluvial zone are degraded and cracked,
with clayey infill in the open cracks.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In situ measurements using three different seismic methods were performed at the survey
locations in a very practical and effective way. The same seismic equipment and, in most
of the cases, the same acquisition parameters were used, providing time and cost
effective survey for subsurface characterization.
The measurements were performed using the SoilSpy Rosina multichannel digital
seismograph (MoHo - Science & Technology, Italy). The seismic energy was generated
with vertical impacts by a 10 kg sledge hammer on an aluminum plate and was recorded
by 4.5 Hz vertical geophones, with a sampling frequency of 256Hz and 1024Hz.
Certain site specific details on the “in situ” measurements are as follows:
Location Skopje:
x Seismic refraction measurements were performed along seismic spread of 17 channels
using the following acquisition parameters: spacing between geophones 3m, near off-set
(minimal source to receiver distance) of 3m, excitation step 12m at 5 points through the
seismic spread, duration of seismic record 0.5s and sampling frequency 1024 Hz.
x 2D MASW and seismic reflection measurements were performed along seismic spread
of 17 channels as well, using the following acquisition parameters: spacing between
geophones of 2m, excitation step of 2m, near off-set 6 m, duration of seismic record 0.5s
and sampling frequency 1024 Hz. The total number of the source-receiver configuration
displacements for the roll-a-long measurements was 13.
Location Konsko:
x Seismic refraction measurements were performed along Rp11(seismic spread of 17
channels) and Rp7 (seismic spread of 34 channels) using the following acquisition
parameters: spacing between geophones 5m, excitation step 5m, near off-set of 5m, and
duration of seismic record 0.5s. For the measurements along Rp11, a sampling frequency
of 1024Hz was used, while for the Rp7 seismic profile, a sampling frequency of 256Hz
was used.
x 1D MASW measurements were performed along 3 seismic spreads of 17 channels using
the following acquisition parameters: distance between geophones 5m, near offset of 5m,
duration of seismic record 0.5s and sampling frequency of 1024Hz.
189
ȺV LW FDQ EH QRWLFHG WKH DFTXLVLWLRQ SDUDPHWHUV ZHUH WKHVDPH LQ PRVW RI WKH FDVHV 7KH
choice of these parameters was not random. Experimental research was carried out for a long
period using the above-mentioned seismic methods in order to define the optimal parameters
for successful application of an integrated technique in future research.
The pre-processing of the data was performed using the SoilSpy Rosina software, MoHo -
Science & Technology, Italy.
The consecutive analyses and interpretation of seismic refraction and reflection data were
carried out applying the ReflexW software - Dr. K-J. Sandmeier, Germany. Processing of the
seismic refraction data using the tomographic approach consists of: the first arrival travel
time estimation, definition of an initial model, application of a simulation technique of
tomography for estimation of the final model. The algorithm is based on an iterative
adaptation (SIRT-Simultaneous Iterative Reconstruction Technique).
Processing of the seismic reflection data was performed using the Common Mid Point (CMP)
technique which consists of stacking the seismic records reflected from the same point at the
stratigraphic boundaries (W. Knapp, 1986). A pre-stacking static correction and 1D and 2D
filtering was applied on the raw data as was also post-stacking depth migration. The complex
processing of the seismic reflection data allows definition of the layer boundaries, seismic
bedrock, local deformations and discontinuities with a very high accuracy and resolution.
The SurfSeis 3.06 software of the Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) was applied for the post-
processing of the MASW raw data. The dispersion images were generated using the
“wavefield transformation” method. The next step consisted of effective dispersion curve
extraction. The dispersion curves were extracted for each source-receivers configuration
displacement. The inversion was performed for each of the dispersion curves by the iterative
process proposed by Xia et al. (1999). The final results were 1DVs models for the survey in
Konsko, and 2DVs model for the survey in the yard of Kurshumli An, Skopje.
RESULTS
The results from the geophysical survey at the location of Kurshumli An, Skopje are
represented as 2D Vp seismic refraction model (Fig.2a), 2D seismic reflection section
(Fig.2b) and 2DVs MASW model (Fig.2c). The seismic models in combination with the
geological data, reflect the seismo-geological characteristics of the site. The survey using
three different methods was performed along the same profile line. The 2D MASW model
refers to the position of 15-39m along the seismic refraction and reflection profile.
According to the 2D Vp and Vs models and geological data for the investigated site, the
surface layers of the terrain are composed of quaternary, alluvial-proluvial deposits, which
are characterized by seismic velocities in the range of Vp=170-1750 m/s, and Vs=100-
600m/s. They overlying Pliocene sediments are mainly composed of gravel, sand, sandstones
etc., which are characterized by Vp>1800m/s, Vs>600m/s. The thickness of the quaternary
deposits varies in the range of 8m to 15m. This anomaly i.e. the sharp change of the
quaternary thickness is registered at each seismic profile. The anomaly is clearly mapped on
the seismic refraction model (along a distance of 10-38m) and the MASW model. The
190
velocity inversion mapped at 4-5m in the 2D Vs MASW model indicates a groundwater level.
The same variation of the seismic bedrock topography is interpreted at the seismic reflection
2D model. The reflection model indicates deformations in the deeper layers, as well.
The results from this survey represent a ‘school’ example for the reliable and accurate
distinguishing of the boundaries between layers and definition of the anomalies and
deformations in the subsurface structure. In the first place, the anomaly was registered as a
result of the seismic refraction survey, but the use of only one methodology would have led
to greater skepticism regarding the reliability of the result. To improve the accuracy and
resolution, other two of the above mentioned seismic methods were additionally used for
modeling, which confirmed the reliability of the results.
Fig. 2.The 2D models as a result of the survey performed in Skopje, Kurshumli An a) Vp seismic
refraction tomography model b) 2D Seismic reflection section. c) 2D Vs model as a result of the
MASW survey
191
The results from the seismic refraction surveys in Konsko, Gevgelija are 2D Vp and Vs
PRGHOVUHIHUULQJWRɚGHSWKRI-50m. According to the existing geological data, the terrain
of the location is composed of gabro covered with diluvial material. The 2D models in
combination with geological data distinguished and defined the depth of the surface critical
zone which consists of a layer composed of diluvial material with clay infill and layer of
intensively cracked, degraded rocks undergoing the process of disintegration, with values of
seismic velocities Vs=100-480m/s. To improve the subsurface characterization accuracy, 1D
MASW surveys were performed along the refraction profiles using the same acquisition
parameters. The high impedance contrast between the surface degraded layers and more
compact rock layers in their base contributed to extraction of good quality dispersion curves.
Fig. 3. 2D Vp seismic refraction model Rp7 as a result of the survey performed in Konsko
Fig. 4. a-1) Dispersion image D1 with extracted dispersion curve (white dots). 1D MASW survey
along first half of Rp7 seismic profile. a-2) 1D Vs model as a result of D1 dispersion curve inversion
(refers to 40m position of the Rp7 profile). b-1) Dispersion image D2 with extracted dispersion curve
(white dots). 1D MASW survey along second half of Rp7 seismic profile. b-2) 1D Vs model as a
result of D2 dispersion curve inversion (refers to 120m position of the Rp7 profile)
192
In this paper, the results from the survey along the Rp7 and Rp11 seismic profiles performed
at the most critical part of the location according to the thickness of the surface highly
weathered zones (surface and subsurface layers) are shown.
According to the seismic refraction models, the max.thickness in this part of the location is
approximately 20-22m, while the reliability of the results is confirmed by the 1D Vs MASW
models (Fig.3-Fig.6).
Fig. 5. 2D Vp seismic refraction model Rp11 as a result of the survey performed in Konsko
Fig. 6. a) Dispersion image D3 with extracted dispersion curve (white dots). 1D MASW surveys
along Rp11 seismic profile. b) 1D Vs model as a result of D3 dispersion curve inversion (refers to
40m position of the Rp11 profile)
CONCLUSIONS
From the above presented can be concluded that using an integrated geophysical approach is
very significant for a high quality, accurate and reliable subsurface modeling. For the site
characterization were applied the combined methods of seismic refraction, seismic reflection
and MASW. The in-situ measurements and data processing were conducted in the most
practical, cost and time-effective way, with the same equipment, and in some cases the same
acquisition parameters.
193
The combination of three different seismic methods for site characterization gave a very
satisfying result. Each of the techniques showed some limitations and disadvantages, but their
application in an integrated approach enabled the results to be compared and to complement
each other, which reduced the error likelihood in interpretation.
According to the results from the geophysical survey in Skopje, the seismic refraction method
proved to be great tool for preliminary subsurface characterization and detecting potential
anomalies. The tomographic approach for data processing enabled modeling of the
subsurface with both lateral and vertical velocity gradients, which provided high resolution
imaging of the subsurface structure.
2D Vs MASW model defined the variation of the seismic bedrock topography depth with
very good resolution and confirmed the reliability of the seismic refraction survey results.
This surface wave’s method complemented and improved the subsurface modeling of the
investigated location mapping the velocity inversion i.e. trapped low velocity layer. The
velocity inversion was defined at the depth of approx. 5m which indicate on groundwater
level, and at the depth of 8-15 meters as well where the anomaly is detected with both
methods.
The roll-a-long MASW technique enabled the data to be used for seismic reflection
processing. Using the CMP method for reflection processing resulted in very accurate, high
resolution modeling of the subsurface up to the depth of 100m.
The seismic refraction and 1D MASW survey at the Konsko location, proved to be an
excellent combination for fast and accurate subsurface modeling especially in hard terrain
conditions. The defined thickness of the highly weathered zones (surface and subsurface
layers) as a result of the seismic refraction survey, was confirmed in a fast and practical way
using 1D MASW method, performed along the same profile lines using the same acquisition
parameters.
REFERENCES:
Dumurdzanov N., Serafimovski T. and Burchfield BC. [2004]. Evolution of the Neogene Pleistocene
Basins of Macedonia: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Digital Map and
Chart Series 1 (accompanying notes), 20 p.
Gjorgjeska, I [2014]. Application of Seismic Methods for Site Characterization. Proceedings of 4th
Symposium organized by Macedonian Association for Geotechnics (MAG).
Gjorgjeska, I et al . [2018a], Optimization of MASW Field Acquisition Parameters - A Case Study in
the Skopje Urban Area. Proceedings of the 16ECEE.
Gjorgjeska, I. and Sesov, V. [2018b] Geophysical Measurements for a Quarry near the Dam Location,
.RQVNR*HYJHOLMDȽɟɨɮɢɡɢɱɤɢɢɫɬɪɚɠɭɜɚʃɚɡɚɤɚɦɟɧɨɥɨɦɧɚɥɨɤɚɰɢʁɚɧɚɛɪɚɧɚ
ɄɨɧɫɤɨȽɟɜɝɟɥɢʁɚ5HSRUW,=,,6-39, Skopje.
194
Gjorgjeska, I. and Sesov, V. [2019] Geophysical Surveys for a Quarry Characterization - A Case
Study in Konsko, Gevgelija". 10th Congress of the Balkan Geophysical Society. EAGE
Earthdoc DOI: 10.3997/2214-4609.201902611
Kearey P. and Brooks M. [2002], An Introduction to Geophysical Exploration. Adlard and Sons
Limited, The Garden City Press, Letchworth.
Park CB, Miller RD, Xia J.[1999], Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW), Geophysics,
64, 800-808.
Tien-When, Lo. and Philips, L. [2002], Fundamentals of Seismic Tomography. Geophysical
Monograph Series; no. 6, Society of Exploration Geophysicists Tulsa.
W. Knapp, Ralph & W. Steeples, Don. [1986], High-resolution common-depth-point reflection
profiling: Field acquisition parameter design. Geophysics. 51. 283-294.
Xia J, Miller RD, Park CB. [1999], Estimation of Near-Surface Shear-Wave Velocity by Inversion of
Rayleigh Wave: Geophysics, 64, 691-700.
195
StruþQLUDG
UDK 624.131.3
GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR AND ITS

APPLICATION IN ENGINEERING. GPR at IZIIS
Vlatko Sesov, Irena Gjorgjeska, Julijana Bojadjieva,

Toni Kitanovski, Jordanka Chaneva, Dejan Ivanovski,
Kemal Edip
vlatko@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
ABSTRACT
The ground-penetrating radar (GPR) represents a safe, advanced and non-destructive system
that enables fast and effective scanning and diagnostics of engineering structures and
geotechnical environments. The method is based on analysis of high frequency
electromagnetic waves. The system operates by the principle of transmission of EM signals
and receiving reflected electromagnetic waves from the boundaries between media of
different electromagnetic properties. Discussed in this paper are the basic GPR working
principals, the wide application possibilities, with particular emphasis on the GPR equipment
currently available at IZIIS and the possibilities of its application in different engineering
areas.
KEY WORDS: ground-penetrating radar, geotechnics, geophysics
INTRODUCTION
The ground-penetrating radar system enables nondestructive, time saving and economically
efficient research. The principle of operation of the system is based on analysis of high
frequency electromagnetic waves in the range of 10-4Ɇ+]
The standard ground-penetrating radar system is made of the following components: control
unit, visualization monitor, transmitter and receiver.
The transmitters emit EM waves that propagate through different media with velocities that
depend on the properties of the materials constituting the terrain structure and are reflected
from the boundaries that are characterized by a high contrast regarding EM properties. The
electromagnetic waves are recorded by receivers (receiving antennas) that are most
frequently ground coupled or are airborne and also antenna for survey in boreholes.
The choice of antenna depends on the objective of the research and the desired research depth.
For very shallow investigations such as testing of concrete and detection of reinforcement, a
high frequency antenna is used. On the other hand, deeper investigations require an antenna
of a lower central frequency.
196
At the moment, the Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology – IZIIS
has a ground-penetrating radar system with 3 different antennas for investigations of different
scale, namely, ground coupled antennas with a central frequency of 300 MHZ and 1000 MHz
and an airborne antenna with a central frequency of 65 MHz.
The combination of high frequency and low frequency antennas enables a wide spectrum of
research: engineering-geological research such as definition of bedrock, underground water
depth, distinguishing of different lithological media, definition of underground caverns and
crack zones, investigation of landslides. These antennas are also widely used in detection of
underground structures in archaeology and during forensic research as well as in
construction, particularly concrete testing, detection of reinforcement, etc.
The application of the ground-penetrating radar in combination with seismic geophysical
methods that have been applied in IZIIS for a longer period, namely the application of such
an integrated method of research is of a great importance for advancement and raising the
quality of the investigations. These methods are inverse and most frequently do not offer a
unique solution, i.e., the result may be ambiguous, which makes it difficult for interpretation.
By combination of different methods, comparison of the results and complementing the
methods among themselves, the probability for making errors in the interpretation is reduced.
OPERATION PRINCIPLE
The ground-penetrating radar system consists of 3 basic components: a control unit, a

transmitter and a receiver. The transmitters emit short periodic electromagnetic waves that
propagate through different media with velocities that depend on the properties of the
materials constituting the terrain and are reflected from the boundaries characterized by a
high contrast regarding the EM properties.
The reflected electromagnetic waves are recorded by antennas that are most frequently
installed upon the ground surface (ground coupled) or are installed at a certain height from
the ground (airborne). They can also be used in boreholes.
Fig. 1. Scheme of measurements performed by application of ground-penetrating radar.

197
The time between the transmission and the receipt of the electromagnetic wave TWT (two-
way travel time) measured in nanoseconds (ns) is a function of the reflection depth and the
propagation velocity of an EM wave. The GPR investigations enable the obtaining of a
continuous 2D section that shows the amplitudes of the recorded signals as function of time
or depth and distance.
Fig.2. 2D radargram showing the reflection of EM waves from different materials. Underground
objects detection.
The resolution and the quality of the investigations depend on several factors, first of all, the
used equipment and then the medium itself, i.e., the properties of the material through which
the electromagnetic waves propagate.
The maximum depth and resolution of the investigations depends, first, on the central
frequency of the antennas. While using high natural frequency antennas (for example 1 GHz),
transmission of electromagnetic waves of high frequency and small wavelength is performed.
These antennas are used for very shallow investigations, most frequently testing of concrete
and detection of reinforcement. For investigations at larger depths, antennas of lower natural
frequency (30 – 300 MHz) are used for the purpose of emitting waves of a larger wavelength.
The application of low frequency antennas enables reaching of a larger depth, but the
resolution in the shallower layers is reduced. Therefore, the application of a combination of
antennas of different frequency yields the most satisfying results.
The second factor that affects the maximum propagation depth of electromagnetic waves are
the properties of the materials constituting the terrain or the structure. When these represent
materials of high conductivity, the electromagnetic waves are attenuated faster wherefore a
greater depth of research cannot be achieved.
To get a quality and clear insight into the investigated structures and media, a high impedance
contrast between the investigated target and the surrounding medium is also necessary for
reflection of as greater energy as possible, for the purpose of detecting structures and
boundaries between different media with a greater resolution.
The strength of the EM reflection is proportional to the magnitude of this contrast whereat
the amount of energy represented by the reflection coefficient R is:
198
௩మ ିξ௩భ ξఌభ ିξఌమ

ܴ=ξ = (1)
ξ௩మ ାξ௩భ ξఌభ ାξఌమ
where, ‫ݒ‬ଵ and ‫ݒ‬ଶ are the velocities of the electromagnetic wave through two different media,
while ߝଵ and ߝଶ are the relative permittivity of the media.
THE GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR AT IZIIS AND ITS APPLICATION

IN ENGINEERING PRACTICE
The ground-penetrating radar in IZIIS is one of the latest devices available on the world
markets that is permanently upgraded. For the last 20 years, the application of this
nondestructive method has constantly been investigating.
The system at IZIIS consists of the following elements:

x AKULA – 9000C – Multi-channel radar (up to 16 channels), compatible with antennas
with central frequency of 10-4000 MHz
x GCB-300 – Antenna with a central frequency of 307 MHz which is ground coupled. It
is applied in investigations down to maximum depth of 8 m like geotechnical surveys,
detection of underground structures, archaeological investigations, forensic
investigations.
Fig.4. IZIIS’ ground penetration radar system.
x GCB-1000 – Antenna with a central frequency of 1000 MHz that is ground coupled. It
is applied in investigations down to maximum depth of 1m like: testing of concrete and
asphalt, detection of reinforcement, etc.
199
Fig.5. GCB-1000 antenna with a central frequency of 1000 MHz.
x GEKKO-60-SR – antenna with a central frequency of 65 MHz. It is placed at a certain

distance (height) from the ground (airborne). It is applied for deeper investigations down
to maximum depth of 30-50 m: deep geological surveys, mapping of underground water
level, definition of boundaries of different lithological media, testing of dams.
Fig.6. GEKKO-60-SR antenna with a central frequency of 65MHz.
The entire system is transferred by an adapted vehicle on which all elements are installed,
enabling easy and fast performance of measurements. The system is upgraded with a GPS
that precisely defines the coordinates of the sections made.
200
Fig.7. In-situ measurements by use of the GCB-300 – antenna with a central frequency of 307 MHz.
A constituent part of the ground penetration radar system is also a special acquisition software
(GAS software) and the software for post-processing of data (GPRSoft Pro) developed by
the company for production of equipment, Geoscanners from Sweden.
Fig.8. Processing of raw data recorded by GCB-300 antenna by application of the GPRSoft Pro
software. Distinguishing of boundaries between different media down to depth of 4.8 m.
201
Fig.9. 2D radargram as a result of a survey using GCB-1000 antenna. Rebar detection in concrete
deck
Such integrated system enables successful application of this nondestructive method in a

number of fields, i.e., high quality research in construction, geotechnics, archaeological
investigations, forensics, geological investigations, etc.
Fig.10. 2D radargram as a result of a survey using Gekko 60 antenna. Definition of the boundaries
between different layers and detection of objects, up to a max. depth of 18m
202
Fig.11. 2D radargram as a result of a survey using Gekko 60 antenna. Definition of the boundaries
between different layers and detection of objects, up to a max. depth of 9m
CONCLUSIONS
Given the presented wide field of application and the relatively simple and nondestructive
way of use, the ground penetration radar is very useful and powerful tool in the hands of
experience professionals for a wide range of engineering problems and research activities.
Application of ground-penetrating radar improves the approach to monitoring, control of
engineering structures as well as detailed characterization of ground and detection of
underground installations.
Combination of ground-penetrating radar and seismic geophysical methods that have been
developed and used at IZIIS as an integrated approach is improving the quality of research
performed by the Institute in a number of engineering fields.
REFERENCES:
Annan AP. 2009. Electromagnetic Principles of Ground Penetrating Radar. In Ground Penetrating
Radar: Theory and Applications, Jol HM (ed). Elsevier: Amsterdam; 3-40.
ASTM D6432-11, Standard Guide for Using the Surface Ground Penetrating Radar Method for
Subsurface Investigation, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011,
www.astm.org.
Benedetto, A., & Pajewski, L. (Eds.). (2015). Civil Engineering Applications of Ground Penetrating
Radar. Springer.
%RMDGMLHYD- 'ąEURZVNL05HSRUWIURPSUDFWLFDOVHVVLRQKHOGRQGXULQJWKH
training school of application of ground penetration radar in civil engineering problems held
in Osijek, Croatia, 06th-09th of March, 2017.
Cassidy NJ. 2009. Ground Penetrating Radar Data Processing, Modelling and Analysis. In Ground
Penetrating Radar: Theory and Applications, Jol HM (ed). Elsevier: Amsterdam; 141-176.
www.geoscanners.com
203
UDK 624.042.7
624.131.55(497.2)
ASSESSMENT OF THE DYNAMIC SOIL

PROPERTIES FOR THE FEM MODEL OF THE
LIULYAKOVITSA TAILINGS DAM
Nikolay Kerenchev, Nikolay Milev
University of architecture, civil engineering and geodesy – Sofia;
Hr. Smirnenski 1; Bulgaria, kerenchev@hotmail.com , n.milev@yoda-bg.com
ABSTRACT:
Liulyakovitsa tailings dam, located in the central part of Bulgaria is the largest in the Balkans
region. The main dam of the facility is about 180 m above the terrain and has a slope of 15ͼ
on the free side. It is expected that the tailing dam will be build up with another 100 m.
Dynamic analyses has been performed to determine the seismic behaviour of the facility. In
this paper we concentrate on the soil properties that were need for the 2D dynamic FEM
model. Based on data from field geophysical measurements and dynamic triaxial test, initial
shear modulus G0, shear modulus reduction and hysteresis damping coefficient D (all as
functions of shear deformations) are determined. All basic soil parameters e.g. friction angle,
void ratio as well as E-modulus and others are also discussed.
KEY WORDS: dynamic soil properties, shear modulus, hysteresis damping, tailings dam
PROCENA ',1$0,ý.,+SVOJSTAVA TLA ZA

FEM MODEL LILIJAKOVITSKE JALOVIŠNE
BRANE
REZIME
Jalovina brane Liuliakovitsa koja se nalazi u FHQWUDOQRPGHOX%XJDUVNHQDMYHüDMHXUHJLRQX
Balkana. Glavna brana objekta nalazi se oko 180 m iznad terena i ima nagib od 15 ° na
VORERGQRM VWUDQL 2þHNXMH VH GDüH VH EUDQDRG UHSRYDL]JUDGLWL VD MRã P ,]YUãHQH VX
GLQDPLþNH DQDOL]H NDNR EL VH XWYUGLOR VHL]PLþNR SRQDãDQMH REMHNWD 8 RYRP UDGX
NRQFHQWULãHPR VH QD VYRMVWYD WOD NRMD VX ELOD SRWUHEQD ]D ' GLQDPLþNL )(0 PRGHO 1D
RVQRYXSRGDWDNDL]WHUHQVNLKJHRIL]LþNLKPMHUHQMDLGLQDPLþNRJWURRVQRJLVSLWLYDQMDXWYUÿXMH
VH SRþHWQL PRGXO VPLFDQMD * VPDnjenje modula smicanja i koeficijent prigušivanja
histereze D (sve kao funkcije smicnih deformacija). Svi osnovni parametri tla, npr. Ugao
trenja, omjer praznine kao i E-PRGXOLGUXJLVHWDNRÿHUD]PDWUDMX
./M8ý1(5,-(ý,GLQDPLþNDVYRMVWYDWODPRGXOVPLcanja, histerezijsko prigušivanje,

brana u jalovinama
204
INTRODUCTION
This paper describes a small part of a more general topic related to the seismic reaction of
one of the biggest tailings dam in Europe. Part of the topic was assigned to an academic team
from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS) and the University of Architecture, Civil
Engineering and Geodesy (UACEG). Historic data could be found in [1]. For the seismic
stability assessment, dynamic analysis should be performed. Such type of analyses is usually
done with the help of FEM models. The physical soil properties used in the program solutions
are often directly or indirectly obtained. Based on the tailings dam material specifics, such
type of parameters are rarely described in scientific and technical literature. One of the
parameters to obtain is the E50 Modulus. Other important soil properties are related to shear
modulus and its reduction curve, hysteretic damping and its change with the increasing
strains. This article will concentrate exclusively on these parameters and the standard
physical parameters of the tailings material obtained in laboratory test, for the purpose of
FEM modelling. More on the constitutive models parameters is given in [5] and [2]. Figure 1
shows the mixed picture of different layers, based mostly on deposits technology and on-
going tests, while figure 2 shows the generalisation of the soil layers for the seismic analysis.
Fig. 1 Soil (tailings dam material) layers, based mostly on deposits technology and
on-going tests
Fig. 2 Generalisation of the soil layers
SHEAR STRENGTH
The paper focus on the dynamic parameters, but since the shear strength is also part of the
FEM models it is important to show the obtained test results and its implementation in the
model. The results are based mostly on triaxial tests and direct shear tests, as well as insitu
tests performed as on-going tests. Since the old geotechnical standards and the geologist
205
involved does not treat the dynamic soil properties as important input data, most of the data
are regular physical properties and shear tests. Those test are presented as graphs, based on
the depth of the samples. Figure 3 shows the data for the friction angle based on the on-going
tests.
Fig. 3 )ULFWLRQDQJOHĳͼ) for the tailings dam material – laboratory tests, pressuremeter, dilatometer
It is clear that the data are scattered all over the graph. Some tendency for higher friction
angle with the depth could be noticed. The scattered laboratory data could be explained with
the technology of deposition of the tailings dam material, as well as different sample
extraction, preparation and testing. The pressuremeter data have smaller standard deviation.
The dilatometer data are always showing the same result. The depth independency could be
explained based on the material type and relative equal grain size and consistency. Figure 4
shows the cohesion with depth based on laboratory test and its comparison to the insitu tests.
Fig. Cohesion for the tailings dam material – laboratory tests

206
Fig. 5 Fig. Cohesion for the tailings dam material –comparison laboratory tests insitu tests
It is noticeable that the relevant cohesion values are under 20 kPa, based on the laboratory
tests, and about 50 based on insitu tests. The insitu tests also shows relation between the
cohesion and the depth, which is not the case with the laboratory tests.
E MODULUS
The triaxial tests were conducted only for estimating the shear resistance of the material,
based on the old geotechnical concepts. It is still not common in the country to estimate the
E50 modulus. Later, more precise model of the material behaviour and the performance of
the dam should be made. A team of geotechnical material model experts stepped in. Even
that was not enough for precise model solution, but the expectations were reached. E50
modulus is obtained based on the well-known methodology [9] for determining the E50
modulus of the standard triaxial undrained and drained test. Figure 6 and 7 shows the E50
modulus correlation with void ratio and sand percentage.
One of the best-known relations of E50 modulus is the one with the void ratio. Tailings dam
materials are not excluded. The logarithmic curve fits best on the scatter and it corresponds
to the expectance. These results could be explained with the small strain stiffness nature and
the particle distribution of the dense material. In general the value limits are 8000 – 15000
kPa.
207
25000
E50 Modulus, kPa 20000
15000
E50 / Void ration
10000
Log. (E50 / Void
5000 ration)
y = -8688ln(x) + 8501.1
R² = 0.285
0
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Void ratio, -
Fig. 6. E50 modulus vs void ratio.
25000
20000
E50 Modulus, kPa
15000
E50 / % sand
10000 particles
Linear (E50 / % sand
5000 particles)
0
10 30 50 70 90
Sand porcentage, %
Fig. 7. E50 modulus in vs sand percentage.
It is common that the E50 modulus is important characteristic for granular material behavior
and is highly dependent on sand and gravel content. Most of the samples are granular material
and consist of sand and silt, whereas gravel and clay are not presented. More on E50 Modulus
on tailings dam materials in [2].
DYNAMIC PARAMETERS
Disturbed soil samples from the Liulyakovitsa tailings dam are tested in triaxial apparatus in
Tokyo [6]. Its natural water content (saturated) is artificially recovered. The density index is
208
recovered to the value of depth 12-33 meters [8]. Physical parameters of the dynamic soil
samples are given in Table 1. And the sieving curve is shown on figure 8.
Table 1. Sieving curve of the tailings dam material used for the triaxial dynamic tests
Spec. Dry Void Max. Min. Density Av. Part. Unifor Friction
density density Ratio void void index Part. smaller mity angle
ratio ratio Diame- than 75 coeffici
ter ȝm ent
ȡs ȡd e e max e min Dr D 50 FC CU ࢥ
[g/cm3] [g/cm3] [-] [-] [-] [%] [mm] [%] [-] [ɨ]
2.73 1.79 0.527 1.200 0.501 96 0.17 7.62 1.89 22.00
Fig. 8. Sieving curve of the tailings dam material used for the triaxial dynamic tests
INITIAL SHEAR MODULUS AND SHEAR MODULUS REDUCTION CURVE
Determining the initial shear modulus also known as maximal shear modulus is based on
trigger and bender elements. The shear reduction curve in the shear deformation zone
between 10-6 and 10-3 are obtained based on the internal deformation transducer and the zone
above 10-3 based on external displacement transducer. Using the described technique, the
apparatus could obtain the shear modulus and the shear modulus reduction curve related to
the shear deformation in much wider zone compared to other apparatus. Figure 9 shows the
obtained data based on several detection technique.
209
140
Shear Modulus, Gu [MPa] 120
100 Test 122: Dr=95%;
ʍΖc=50kPa
80
60
40 Test 122: Trigger-
20 elements/acceleromet
ers - Dr=95%;
0
ʍΖc=50kPa
1.E-06 1.E-04 1.E-02 1.E+00
Shear deformation amplitude, ɶa,SA [%]
Fig. 9. Initial shear modulus and shear reduction curve
Based on the apparatus “Komaba” for depth between 5-10m the initial shear modulus is G u
= 75-03DIRUVKHDUGHIRUPDWLRQȖ -6 %.; G u = 70 -03DIRUȖ -3 % and down
WR* 03DIRUȖ -1 %.
Based on the graph above and the well know elasticity formula:
Eu Eu
Gu G' | , (1)
2(1 Q ) 3
where:
G u – shear modulus; E u - modulus of deformation, Ȟ– poisons coefficient;we could also
obtain the E modulus reduction curve, Figure 10.
%DVHRQWKHXOWUDVRXQGVHLVPRVFRSHWKHLQLWLDOPD[LPDOVKHDUPRGXOXVLVDERXWɆɊɚ-

ɆɊɚ ZKLFK HYHQ GRHVQ¶W corresponds to the well-known factor of 2, for the shear
modulus investigation based on insitu tests.
DAMPING RATIO
Since the damping ratio is one of the most important parameters for dynamic calculation,
some tests are performed. Based on thhose tests the damping ratio for the lower level of shear
deformation could not be estimated. Here could help another part of this apparatus or a
resonant column tests [3]. Literature data could also be used. We could obtain the lower limit
of dampis between 3 and 6 %. Figure 11 show the dampig ratio obtained from the dynimic
triaxial tests for the tailings dam material.
210
350
Modul of deformation, Eu,cyclic 300
250
Test 122: Dr=95%;
200 ʍΖc=50kPa
[MPa]
150 Test 123: Dr=95%;

100 ʍΖc=80kPa
50 Test 121: Dr=95%;
ʍΖc=100kPa
0
1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Axial deformation amplitude, ɸa,SA [%]
Fig. 10. Modulus of deformation and its reduction curve in respect to axial deformations
0.25
Damping ratio, x [ - ]
0.20
Test 122: Dr=95%;
0.15
ʍΖc=50kPa
0.10 Test 123: Dr=95%;
ʍΖc=80kPa
0.05 Test 121: Dr=95%;
ʍΖc=100kPa
0.00
1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00
Shear deformation amplitude, ɶa,SA [%]
Fig. 11. Damping ration and its values in respect to shear deformations
CORRELATIONS AND DISCUSSION
Based on this data, as well as many standard physical parameters many correlations for the
dynamic material properties of the tailings dam are made. Well known correlation is that of
Ishibashi & Zhang (1993) [3] ,[4].
G m J , PI m0
K J , PI V '0
Gmax
(2)
211
where:
§ § § 0.000102 n(PI) ·0,4 · ·
K J , PI 0,5 ¨1 tanh ¨ ln ¨ ¸ ¸¸ ¸¸ ,
¨ ¨ © J ¹ ¹¹
© ©
§ § § 0, 000556 ·0,4 · ·
m J , PI m0 0, 272 1 tanh ¨ ln ¨
¨
¨ ¨ © J ¹

¸ ¸¸ ¸¸ .exp 0, 0145.PI
1.3

© © ¹¹
There is also many other graphical correlation curves for assessing the shear modulus
reduction curve. One of the most used is that from [10]. After applying all those relations we
obtain the initial shear modulus given in table 3.
Table 3. Initial shear modulus of the tailings dam material used for the model
G 0,ref
Ȗ n (Ȗ r ) ı¶ Pɫɪ ı¶ Yɫɪ G0 ĳ c
Layer 3 ȣ (100 kPa)
(kN/m ) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (°) (kPa)
(kPa)
A 19,4 (-) 265,1 410,0 0,35 128 269 78 780 25 10
B 19,5 (-) 477,9 739,0 0,32 206 772 94 575 32 12
C 19,6 (20,4) 730,9 1130,3 0,35 285 725 105 679 27 15
D 20,4 (21,5) 1125,8 1741,4 0,33 403 498 120 246 30 17
2a 20,0 117,0 204,0 0,26 355 035 328 230 38 22
2b 20,0 444,8 778,5 0,26 692 402 328 230 40 22
20 22,0 1043,0 1818,3 0,26 1 060 036 328 230 40 22
Comparison of the values for the shear modulus reduction curve from laboratory tests and
correlation based on literature data are shown on figure 12.
Fig. 12. Verification of the shear modulus - comparison - laboratory tests and correlation
layer Ⱥ
CONCLUSION
Since that was a huge project many other test were also performed. Most oft them not
relevant to the actual models calculation. The parameters are used to help estimate the
dynamic soil properties for the FEM models.
212
REFERENCES
[1] Germanov T., MS 1 – Co-report. Limit states (stability, deformation, erosion..), Proc. XIII
ECSMGE, Vanicek et al. (eds). CGtS Prague, ISBN 80-86769-02-X, (Vol. 3).
[2] Kerenchev, N (2019). ON THE E50 MODULUS OF TAILINGS DAM MATERIALS, 19th
International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2019, vol 19, 1.2, Page 399-404,
DOI: 10.5593/sgem2019/1.2/S02.051
[3] Kerenchev, N. (2015). Analysis of seismic slope stability and deformations. PhD Thesis (in
Bulgarian). UACEG, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia.
[4] Kramer, St., (1996). Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall
[5] Mihova, L., Tanev, T., (2015). Elastic and elasto-plastic constitutive models in soil mechanics.
Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Fascicule IV, Vol.
XLVII, Sofia.
[6] Milev N., Koseki J., (2018) STATIC AND DYNAMIC EVALUATION OF ELASTIC
PROPERTIES OF SOFIA SAND AND TOYOURA SAND BY SOPHISTICATED TRIAXIAL
TESTS, BUILDING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 61 (2018) 1 (47-61.
[7] Milev, N., (2019). Experimental Evaluation of Shear Wave Velocity Change Induced by Repeated
Liquefaction of Sofia Sand by Undrained Cyclic Triaxial Tests - International Conference on
Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (ICEGE 2019), Rome (Italy).
[8] Milev, N., (2016). Soil structure interaction – PhD Thesis (in Bulgarian). Sofia: UACEG.
[9] Schanz T., Vermeer P.A. (2000), The hardening soil model: Formulation and verification Beyond
2000 in Computational Geotechnics – 10 Years of PLAXIS © 1999 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN
90 5809 040 X,
[10] Vucetic, M., Dobry, R., (1991). Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117. No. 1.
213
UDK 624.131.5
SSI AND DAMPER EFFECTS ON FRAME

STRUCTURES
Kemal Edip, Aleskandra Bogdanovic, Vlatko Sheshov,
Zoran Rakicevic
UKIM-IZIIS - Institute of Earthquake Engineering and engineering seismology,
Skopje, North Macedonia, saska@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
ABSTRACT:
In soil structure interaction problems apart from simulation of soil medium the structural
behaviour and especially the vibration reduction effect of viscous dampers is of great
importance. Based on ground medium strength assumptions according to EC8 part 5, a ten
storey frame structure with viscous dampers is simulated. The corresponding models were
analysed as soil structure interaction was taken into consideration including the strength
effects of soil types and inclusion of viscous dampers. The results show that the effect of
viscous dampers has altering effects when soil media are considered in detail.
8ý,1&,66,,'$03(5$1$5$0296.(
KONSTRUKCIJE
REZIME:
U problemima interakcije struktura - tlo, osim simulacije podloge tla, od velikog je ]QDþDMD
strukturno ponašanje, a posebno efekat smanjenja vibracija viskoznih amortizera. Na osnovu
SUHWSRVWDYNL VUHGQMH þYUVWRüH WOD X VNODGX VD (& GHR VLPXOLUDQD MH GHVHWospratna
ramovska NRQVWUXNFLMDVDYLVNR]QLPSULJXãLYDþLPD2GJRYDUDMXüLPRGHOLDnalizirani su kako
je uzeta u obzir interakcija konstrukcija - tlo XNOMXþXMXüL XþLQNH þYUVWRüH QD WLSRYH WOD L
viskozne SULJXãLYDþe 5H]XOWDWL SRND]XMX GD HIHNDW YLVNR]QLK SULJXãLYDþD LPD promenjive
efekte, kada se materijali iz tla detaljno razmatraju.
INTRODUCTION
The study of Soil Structure Interaction (SSI) has been going on for several decades with early
beginnings dated from 1960-70s in the studies of Chameski (1956), Subbarao et al. (1985),
Deshmukh and Karmarkar (1991), Lee and Harrison (1970), Lee and Brown (1972), Morris
(1966), and Dasgupta et al. (1998). The importance of SSI is observed when a high rise
building rests on soft subsoil where there is a need to estimate deformations caused by
application of high loads from earthquake time histories. In simulation of SSI problems it is
of great importance to simulate the load distribution from the building to the soil medium.
Recognizing this important fact, many structural engineers have included representations of
foundation strength and stiffness in their analysis models for many years. On the other hand,
214
the studies performed on damper problem in the literature are almost studies without
considering soil effect. It is generally considered that structure is supported on ground as
rigid. In other words, soil effect is not taken into account in the analyses. Edward and Dimitris
(2008), Spyrakos (2009), Anestis (1974), have shown that SSI significantly modified the
dynamic characteristics of a structure, including frequencies, damping and mode shapes, etc.
So, the performance of the viscous dampers (VDs) which is closely related with the structural
dynamic characteristics will surely be affected by SSI effect. If SSI is neglected, the VDs
might be improperly applied to a structure due to overestimation of the structural response
or the control effectiveness of the energy dissipation system (EDS). Therefore, it is very
important and of great urgency to carry out the research on the performance of the EDS with
SSI effect. In order to fulfil this requirement infinite element boundaries are used to simulate
the infinity in the soil boundaries. The structure is simulated using RC member with damper
elements in order to see the effects of the dampers on the overall response of the frame
structure. When considering the ten storey frame structure, it is of great importance to study
its behaviour subject to the parametric change in the soil stiffness. The seismic response of
the soil-structure viscous damped system was examined using ANSYS 12.1 computer
software. The mechanism of the SSI effect on the performance of the VDs is also discussed.
The obtained results show interesting outcome which should be taken into consideration in
the further analysis.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
In order to consider the soil medium four representative ground types have been considered
according to EC8 soil types of A, B, C and D. Namely the soil conditions have been set
according to the shear wave velocities at the soil media. The following table shows the soil
stiffness variation according to shear wave velocity of top 30 meters according to EC8.
Table 1. Ground types included in the analysis

Ground type Shear wave velocity
A 800m/s
B 580m/s
C 270m/s
D 160m/s
The earthquake input is selected to be the time history of Bitola earthquake with magnitude
of M=5.2 and the time domain presentation is given below in Fig.1.
215
Figure 1. Bitola earthquake time history
The boundaries have been considered to be of infinite elements. The formulation of infinite
elements is the same as for the finite elements in addition to the mapping of the domain.
Infinite elements were first developed by Zienkiewicz et al. (1983)and since then have been
developed in frequency and time domain. In the work of Häggblad et al. (1987) infinite
elements with absorbing properties have been proposed which can be used in time domain.
In this work the development of infinite element has followed the techniques considering the
work of Edip et al (2013). The authors programmed the infinite elements using the User
Programmable Features of the ANSYS software and verification has been detaily considered
in the work of Edip et al. (2013). The soil medium effects on the Bitola earthquake time
history have been shown in the figure below:
216
Figure 2. Soil medium effects on the site response according to EC-8
The soil spectra are derived through site response analysis in which different soil types
according to EC8 are considered. The axis presentations are done to show the dependence of
spectral acceleration versus period [s].
As can be seen from Figure 2, the soil effects have the great impact on the overall results of
the initial earthquake input motion. In order to see the effects a 10 storey structure has been
analysed considering the overall effects due to different types of soil media.
The structure that is analysed in this paper is reinforced concrete frame with ten stories and
the dimensions as shown in figure 3. The frame structure consist of 3 spans with 4.0m and
floor height of 3.0m, designed according to EC8 and EC2 and assumed to be built on four
types of foundation such as rigid foundation, hard soil, medium soil and soft soil. Ten same
viscous dampers (VD) with damping coefficient of 3.00×106 Ns/m are set up in each story in
the middle span.
Figure 3. RC Frame structure with VD Figure 4. Soil-structure interaction model

217
NUMERICAL MODELS
For numerical analysis was used ANSYS software version 12.1 as frequently utilized for
studying SSI-system. The soil structure interaction model developed in the analysis is shown
on figure 4. Columns and beams of the frame are modelled with the 2D beam element-
BEAM3, while the base is simulated by the 2D solid element – PLANE82. In conventional
modelling of frame structures, the soil medium is usually taken into account as a wide region
in order to minimize the reflections of the propagating waves in far field. Fixed conditions at
side boundaries lead to enlargement of internal forces of structural seismic response. The
sub-soil conditions in this study are represented by 30m soil deposits with four layers which
rest on the bedrock. The boundaries are of infinite elements types in which the infinity is
mapped to the finite element domain by mapping functions as given in Figure 5 below:
Figure 5. Coupling of finite and infinite element
The soil medium is altered as soil profiles according to EC8. Contact between foundation
structures and subsoil is modelled by constraint equations which allow the transfer of
moments at the bottom frame structure to the soil by imposing different settlements.
In order to simulate real situation total added mass of each floor is 44t (440 kN), specified
through MASS21 element. Furthermore, viscous dampers applied in the system are modelled
by the spring-damper COMBIN14 element, based on Kelvin Voigt model defined by two
nodes, a spring constant and damping coefficient. The damping portion of the element
contributes only damping coefficients to the structural damping matrix. Values for stiffness
constant and linear damping coefficient are appointed to be 1000 kN/m and 3000 kNs/m,
respectively, for the model previously verified in experimental shake table testing in IZIIS
Laboratory. (Figure6) (Bogdanovic 2014)
Figure 6. Analytical Model for damper device

218
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In order to get a better insight of the structural response by considering different effects the
following comparisons have been done.
Figure 7. Comparisons of Fourier spectra for structural moments at bottom end-right

column of the structure for different type of soil
Fourier spectra for structural moments are obtained using Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT)
with rectangle window type without smoothing.
As can be seen from Figure 7 the structural moment considering different soil types has been
done. For the sake of completeness, the structure with fixed base has been a reference point
for comparisons. When soil types of B and C have been compared it is clearly seen that the
difference between the different soil types does not influence the overall effect. On the other
hand, when soil types of A and D are compared it is clearly seen that for lower frequencies
the soil type D increases the values of the structural moments in the frame structure. As the
frequencies increase this difference becomes small. This is mainly because of the dynamic
characteristics of the interaction between soil and structures natural periods.
Next the displacement comparison is shown at the upmost element of the frame.
219
As can be seen from Figure 8 the effects of soil types can be clearly seen when considering
difference in displacement values. Soil type A is similar to the fixed base response which
shows that in case of strong ground conditions the effects of soil structure interaction are
minimum while when weak soil conditions are in the process the effects are big.
Figure 8. Comparisons of displacements at top of the structure - Point E
Figure 9. Comparison of acceleration at top of the structure – Point E
As can be seen from Figure 9 above there are differences in the acceleration time histories
when the structure is founded on fixed base and on different soil media. When fixed base
frame structure is simulated the maximum value of acceleration is 4.40m/s2. It is clearly seen
that the soil types A and B decrease the maximum acceleration while the soil types of C and
D increase the response of acceleration time histories. The biggest increase can be seen in
the case of soil type C which is a reflection of the spectrum amplification as shown in Figure
2.
220
The first two natural vibration frequencies of SSI_SYSTEM_WITH_VD with varying

ground conditions are given in Table 2. It is evident that stiffer foundation corresponds to
greater value of frequency, which is agreed with tested data obtain by Lou (2004).
Basically, a frame with smaller value of frequency means that it vibrates more slowly during
an earthquake which results in lower excitation frequency for the VDs placed in it.
Table 2. Frequencies of the SSI_SYSTEM_WITH_VD for different ground conditions

Vibration Ground Conditions
mode (Hz) Fixed Soil_Type_A Soil_Type_B Soil_Type_C Soil_Type_D
Base
1st mode 0.80 0.78 0.76 0.65 0.51
2nd mode 2.50 2.47 2.44 1.92 1.18
Figure 10. Force-displacement relationship for viscous damper for fixed base
and different types of soil
221
Studies conducted by Zhou (2006) about VDs confirm that under the same excitation
amplitude, the energy dissipation effect of such dampers gets worse as the excitation
frequency reduces. Consequently, when the foundation of viscous dampers becoming softer,
the energy dissipation system shows less effective behaviour. The above statement is
confirmed with the hysteretic force-displacement relationship of the VD installed in the
bottom storey and presented in figure 7 for different soil sites, obtained for the Bitola
earthquake. It can be seen from the figure that along with the foundation softening, the
hysteretic loops become thinner and flatter. As can be seen from figure 9 there is an
absorption when the differences in soil types are considered. This shows the importance of
the damping elements in the overall SSI system. Taking into account, fixed base system, soil
type A,B,C,D the control effectiveness of the energy dissipation system, presented here with
viscous dampers gradually decreases.
Figure 11. Comparison displacements at different time frames of soil type D
In the time intervals of t 1 and t 2 different displacement values have been shown considering
the soil type D. The displacement values reflect the values of SSI at different heights in which
the point A is at the bottom of the soil medium while point E is at the top of the structure. As
can be seen from Figure 11 inertia effects in the structure take crucial role when soil strength
222
is low such as it is the case in the soil type D. The maximum displacement occurs at time
frame of 3.72 – 3.80s in which the maximum values are shown in the graph. This shows that
the soil type D has increased the displacement values at the top of the structure.
Figure 12. Comparison displacements at different time frames of soil type A
For completeness, the same structure is considered when soil type of A is the basement of
the structure. In Figure 12 the comparison is done for soil type A where it is clearly seen that
the displacement values are less when compared with soil type D. This shows that the SSI
effects have negligible effects in the overall response of the structure since the soil
simulations are done by considering the soil type of A. Thus, it can be stated that the soil
structure interaction effects play significant role when soil conditions are weak and need to
be improved.
223
CONCLUSION
Calculation analysis of the frame structure resting on different types of soil media allowed to
find out that the structural response depends greatly on the soil stiffness characteristics. The
soil structure interaction calculations showed that it is crucial to know the soil conditions in
analysis and design of the structures resting on soil media. On the other hand, the influence
of dampers present in the frame structure has advantageous effects when designed carefully.
The unbounded soil boundary conditions are considered to be of infinite elements which
simulate the boundaries in such a way that no boundaries are reflected back. The results
obtained from the analysis show that effects of soil modelling is important and has to be
considered in simulation of real structures.
REFERENCES
Barone G., Navarra G. and Pirrotta A. (2008). Probabilistic response of linear structures equipped
with nonlinear damper devices. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics. 23:2,125-133.
Bogdanovic, A., K. Edip, and M. Stojmanovska,(2016) Simulation of soil structure interaction
problems considering material properties, Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 3(2):
p. 132-139.
Bogdanovic, A. (2014), Optimal damper placement in steel frame structures, . PhD Thesis, Ss. Cyril
and Methodius: Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology.
Dicleli M. and Mehta A. (2007). Seismic performance of chevron braced steel frames with and
without viscous fluid dampers as a function of ground motion and damper. Constructional Steel
Research. 63:8,1102-1115.
Edip, K.,(2013), Development of three phase model with finite and infinite elements for dynamic
analysis of soil media. PhD Thesis, Ss. Cyril and Methodius: Institute of Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Seismology.
Edward H. and Dimitris C. (2008). Considering dynamic soil structure interaction (SSI) effects on
seismic isolation retrofit efficiency and the importance of natural frequency ratio. Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 28:6,468-479.
Jingbo L., Yin G., Yan W., et al. (2006). Efficient procedure for seismic analysis of soil-structure
interaction system. Tsinghua Science & Technology. 11:6,625-631.
Jinmin Z., Guoxing C., Dong Y., et al. (1997). A study on active seismic control of inelastic structure
considering soil-structure interaction. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering vibration.
17:4,72-80.
Häggblad, B. and G. Nordgren,(1987) Modelling nonlinear soil-structure interaction using interface
elements, elastic-plastic soil elements and absorbing infinite elements. Computers & Structures,
1987. 26(1–2): p. 307-324
Martinez-Rodrigo M. and Romero, M.L.(2003). An optimum retrofit strategy for moment resisting
frames with nonlinear viscous dampers for seismic applications. Engineering Structures.
25:7,913-925.
Mansoori M.R. and Moghadam A.S. (2009). Using viscous damper distribution to reduce multiple
seismic responses of asymmetric structures. Constructional Steel Research. 65:12,2176-2185.
224
Spyrakos C.C., Koutromanos I.A. and Maniatakis Ch.A. (2009). Seismic response of base-isolated
building including soil-structure interaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.
29:4,658-668.
Uriz P. and Whittaker A.S. (2001). Retrofit of pre-Northridge steel moment-resisting frames using
fluid viscous dampers. Structural Design of Tall Buildings. 10:5,371-378.
Yangzhao G., Yun Z. and Xuesong D.(2007). Analysis of the influence of the SSI effects on the
control efficiency of viscous-elastic structures. Chinese Journal of Disaster Prevention and
Mitigation Engineering. 29:3,313-319.
Zienkiewicz, O.C., C. Emson, and P. Bettess,(1993), A novel boundary infinite element,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 19(3): p. 393-404.
225
UDK 624.131.5
HAZARD MODELS IMPLEMENTATION FOR

SKOPJE REGION CONSIDERING SSI OF
MULTISTOREY FRAME WITH VISCOUS
DAMPERS
Vlatko Sheshov*, Zeljko Zugic**, Aleksandra Bogdanovic*,
Radmila Salic*, Marta Stojmanovska*, Kemal Edip
* UKIM-IZIIS, Skopje, Republic of N.Macedonia, vlatko@pluto.iziis.ukim.edu.mk,

saska@pluto.iziis.ukim.edu.mk, r_salic@pluto.iziis.ukim.edu.mk,
marta@pluto.iziis.ukim.edu.mk, kemal@pluto.iziis.ukim.edu.mk
** Government of Serbia, Belgrade, Republic of Serbia,
ABSTRACT
The real behavior of structures in contact with ground involves an interactive process
beginning with the construction phase and ending with a state of balance after a period of
adjustment of stresses and strains within the structure and within the ground influenced by
the structure. Recognizing this important fact, many structural engineers have included
representations of foundation strength and stiffness in their analysis models for many years.
Studies that have been made on the effect of soil-structure interaction problems, point out that
the interaction effects are found quite significant, particularly for the structures resting on
highly compressible soils. In simulation of SSI problems it is of great importance to simulate
the load distribution from the building to the soil medium. The studies performed on damper
problem in the literature are almost studies without considering soil effect. It is generally
considered that structure is supported to ground as rigid. If SSI is neglected, the VDs might
be improperly applied to a structure due to overestimation of the structural response or the
control effectiveness of the viscous energy dissipation system. On the other hand, the
improvement in model prediction in hazard assessment has enabled usage of different criteria
in order to obtain a uniform spectrum which enables the selection of the input accelerations
to be as correct as possible. In this study, a ten storey frame structure with viscous dampers
is simulated considering the hazard curve especially designed for the specific site in Skopje.
The frame structure has been analyzed using two different time history analysis. The
differences and the results obtained in terms of accelerations and displacements are compared
and discussed thoroughly.
KEYWORDS: Site specific hazard, soil structure interaction, earthquakes

226
IMPLEMENTACIJA MODELA HAZARDA ZA

OBLAST SKOPLJA PREMA SSI ZA VIŠESPRATNU
RAMOVSKU KONSTRUKCIJU SA VISKOZNIM
DAMPERIMA
REZIME
6WYDUQRSRQDãDQMHJUDÿHYLQDXGRGLUX VD WORP XNOMXþXMH LQWHUDNWLYQL SURFHV NRML ]DSRþLQMH
ID]RP L]JUDGQMH L ]DYUãDYD VWDQMHP UDYQRWHåH QDNRQ SHULRGD SULODJRÿDYDQMD QDSUH]DQMD L
naprezanja XQXWDU JUDÿHYLQH L XQXWDU WOD SRG XWLFDMHP NRQVWUXNFLMH 6KYDWDMXüL RYX YDåQX
þLQMHQLFX PQRJL JUDÿHYLQVNL LQåHQMHUL GXJL QL] JRGLQD XNOMXþXMX VYRMH SULND]H þYUVWRüH L
NUXWRVWLXPRGHOHDQDOL]H6WXGLMHNRMHVXUDÿHQHRXWLFDMXSUREOHPDLQWHUDNFLMHWODLJUDÿHYLQH
ukazuju na to da su efekti ovih interakcija SULOLþQR ]QDþDMQL SRVHEQR ]D JUDÿHYLQH NRMH
SRþLYDMX QD YLVRNR VWLVOMLYom tlu 8 VLPXODFLML 66, SUREOHPD RG YHOLNRJ MH ]QDþDMD GD VH
VLPXOLUDUDVSRGHODRSWHUHüHQMDRG]JUDGHGRWOD6WXGLMHL]YHGHQHRSroblemu prigušivanja u
literaturi su skoro studije bez razmatranja uticaja tla. Generalno se smatra da je konstrukcija
podržana od tla kao kruta. Ako se SSI zanemari, VD-ovi se mogu nepravilno naneti na
konstrukciju zbog precenjene strukturne reakcije ili kontrolne efikasnosti sistema za rasipanje
YLVNR]QH HQHUJLMH 6 GUXJH VWUDQH SREROMãDQMH SUHGYLÿDQMD PRGHOD X SURFHQL hazarda
RPRJXüLOR MH NRULãüHQMH UD]OLþLWLK NULWHULMXPD NDNR EL VH GRELR XMHGQDþHQ VSHNWDU NRML
RPRJXüDYD GD L]ERU XOD]QLK XEU]DQMD EXGH ãWR WDþQLML 8 RYRM VWXGLML VLPXOLUDQD MH
deseterospratna ramovska NRQVWUXNFLMDVDYLVNR]QLPSULJXãLYDþLPDX]LPDMXüLXRE]LUNULYX
hazarda SRVHEQRGL]DMQLUDQX]DVSHFLILþQRPHVWRX6NRSOMXKonstrukcija okvira analizirana
MH SRPRüX GYH UD]OLþLWH DQDOL]H LVtorije vremena. Razlike i rezultati dobijeni u pogledu
ubrzanja i pomHUDQMDVXXSRUHÿHQLLdetaljno diskutovani.
./-8ý1(5(ý,Hazard na lokaicji, interakcija konstrukcije - tlo, zemljotres
INTRODUCTION
The study of Soil Structure Interaction (SSI) has been going on for several decades with early
beginnings dated from 1960-70s. The importance of SSI is observed when a high rise
building rests on soft subsoil where there is a need to estimate deformations caused by
application of high loads from earthquake time histories. In simulation of SSI problems it is
of great importance to simulate the load distribution from the building to the soil medium.
Recognizing this important fact, many structural engineers have included foundation strength
and stiffness in their analysis models for many years. On the other hand, the studies
performed on damper problem in the literature are almost studies without considering soil
effect. It is generally considered that structure is supported on ground as rigid. In other words,
soil effect is not taken into account in the analyses.
Within this paper a ten storey frame structure with viscous dampers was analyzed considering
soil structure interaction and including vibration reduction effects due to the viscous dampers.
The uniform hazard spectrum (UHS) is used as target spectra in selecting and scaling of
records as an input in nonlinear dynamic analysis. For analyzing of the selected structure,
two earthquake time-histories are used and obtained results were compared and discussed.
227
DEFINITION OF SEISMIC HAZARD
Reliable definition of seismic hazard at particular site is of outmost importance in definition

of seismic input for structural analysis. In this study, seismic hazard definition is based on
the latest research in domain of seismic hazard, presented in detail in Milutinovic et al.
DFFHSWHGDVDSDUWRI1DWLRQDO$QQH[WR(&ɆɄɋ(1-ɇȺ
2.1. (&6HLVPLF+D]DUGPRGHOɆɄɋ(1-ɇȺ
7KHVHLVPLFKD]DUGDQDO\VLVIRUɆɄɋ(1-ɇȺDUHSHUIRUPHGXVLQJWKH
probabilistic seismic hazard approach (PSHA) which integrates the effects of all possible
seismic sources that have influence on the location of interest through deriving the combined
probability of exceedance.
The model itself is a combination of 2 seismo-tectonic models: (M1) grid source model and
(M2) area source model. Logic tree apparatus was chosen as a tool to capture the epistemic
uncertainty associated with the seismo-tectonic sources and its parameters as well as the
ground-motion prediction models used. The applied logic tree scheme accounts the
variability of: (1) Two seismo-tectonic models; (2) Different M max estimations; (3) Different
M 0 thresholds; and (4) Four attenuation models. According the results of the study which
was part of regional BSHAP effort (Salic et al., 2017), the following GMPEs were used for
hazard estimation: BSSA14 (Boore et al., 2014), CY14 (Chiou and Youngs, 2014), Aetal14
(Akkar et al., 2014) and Betal14 (Bindi et al., 2014). For the investigated site, UHS (Uniform
Hazard Spectrum) was defined for 2 referent return periods T DLR and T NCR , as defined by
EC8.
a) PDLR=10% in 10 years a) PNCR=10% in 50 years

Fig. 1. UHS for the investigated site, Soil type A (vs30=800m/s)
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
In order to consider the soil medium four representative ground types have been considered
according to EC8 soil type of D with shear wave velocity of 160m/s. Namely the soil
conditions have been set according to the shear wave velocities at the soil media. In selection
of earthquakes the spectrum developed for the selected location has been used. The selected
earthquakes have been chosen from Peer Base as follows: EQ.1 is time history from L’Aquila
earthquake, Italy in 2009 with magnitude 6.3. On the other hand the second time history
(EQ.2) is time history selected from Irpinia earthquake, Italy in 1980 with magnitude of 6.9.
228
Correlation between spectra of these two earthquake records with spectrum is given in Fig.
2 below.
Fig. 2 Comparison of spectra with nominal earthquake records.
Consequently to the spectra given in Fig.2 the time histories of both earthquakes are given in
Fig 3 below.
Fig.3. Time histories of the selected earthquake records EQ1 and EQ2
As can be seen from Fig. 3 the selected earthquakes are with different magnitudes and
frequencies in order to trigger different deformations in the frame structure. The structure
that is considered is reinforced concrete frame with ten stories and the dimensions as shown
in Fig.4. The frame structure consist of 3 spans with 4.0m and floor height of 3.0m, designed
according to EC8 and EC2 and assumed to be built on four types of foundation such as rigid
foundation, hard soil, medium soil and soft soil. Ten same viscous dampers (VD) with
damping coefficient of 3.00×106 Ns/m are set up in each story in the middle span.
229
Fig. 4. Frame structure including viscous dampers with and without soil model
INFINITE ELEMENTS AND DAMPERS IN NUMERICAL SIMULATION
The formulation of infinite elements is the same as for the finite elements in addition to the
mapping of the domain. In this work the development of infinite element has followed the
techniques considering the time domain in which the infinite element is obtained from a six
nodded finite element as shown in Fig 1.
Fig. 5. Coupling of finite and infinite elements
The element displacement in u and v direction is interpolated with the usual shape functions
N1, N2, N4, N5 and N7:
230
1 2 4 5 7
u [N N 0 N N 0 N 0]u
1 2 4 5 7
v [N N 0 N N 0 N 0]v (1)
In expression (1), u and v are vectors with nodal point displacements in global coordinates.
The shape functions are given in expression (2) as:
N1 -(r -1)(-1 s )( s 1 r ) / 4
N 2
(r -1)(1 r )(-1 s ) / 2
N 4
-(r -1)(1 s )( s -1- r ) / 4 (2)
N 5
-(r -1)(1 r )(1 s ) / 2
N7 (-1 s )(1 s )(r -1) / 2
Based on the iso-parametric concept, the infinite element in global coordinate is mapped onto
an element in local coordinate system using the expression in (3). In the formulation of the
infinite element, only the positive r direction extends to infinity.
1 2 4 5 7
r [M M 0 M M 0 M 0]r
1 2 4 5 7
s [M M 0 M M 0 M 0]s (3)
where
1 (1 s ) rs
M
1 r
2 (1 s )(1 r )
M
2(1 r )
4 (1 s ) rs
M (4)
1 r
5 (1 s )(1 r )
M
2(1 r )
7 2 r (1 s )(1 s )
M
(1 r )
In expression (3), r and s are vectors of nodal point displacements in local coordinates where
it is to be mentioned that, on the side of infinity (r=1), no mappings are assigned to the nodes
as it is taken that no displacement is possible at infinity. The number and location of the
nodes connecting finite and infinite elements must coincide to guarantee continuity condition
between the elements. The main advantage of the proposed infinite elements is that the
number of nodes on the infinite element allow coupling with finite elements with eight nodes
which are used for displacement sensitive problems. For the absorbing layer of the infinite
element, the Lysmer-Kuhlmeyer approach is used. In all cases, a plane strain two
231
dimensional case is studied. For impact of plane waves on element sides, normal and
tangential stresses are derived as follows:
ªV n º ªaUc p 0 º ªu n º
« » « s»« t »
(5)
¬W ¼ ¬ 0 b U c ¼ ¬ u ¼
where cP and cS indicate compression and shear waves, ȡ is the density of soil medium. By
adding together the parts from each element, the governing incremental equations for
equilibrium in dynamic analysis are obtained. The programming of the infinite element has
been done using the Programmable Features of ANSYS. For the sake of verification of the
presented infinite elements, a couple of unbounded problems taking into account the static
and dynamic cases, are shown.
In order to simulate real situation total added mass of each floor is 44t (440 kN), specified
through MASS21 element. Furthermore, viscous dampers applied in the system are modelled
by the spring-damper COMBIN14 element, based on Kelvin Voigt model defined by two
nodes, a spring constant and damping coefficient. The damping portion of the element
contributes only damping coefficients to the structural damping matrix. Values for stiffness
constant and linear damping coefficient are appointed to be 1000 kN/m and 3000 kNs/m,
respectively, for the model previously verified in experimental shake table testing in IZIIS
Laboratory.
Figure 6. Analytical Model for damper device
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In order to get a better insight of the structural response by considering different effects the
acceleration comparisons have been done (Fig. 7-10).
232
Fig. 7. Comparisons of accelerations at middle of the structure - Point D with EQ1
Fig. 8. Comparisons of accelerations at top of the structure - Point E with EQ1
As can be seen from figures above there are differences in the acceleration time histories
when the structure is founded on fixed base and on soil ground. When fixed base frame
structure is simulated the maximum value of acceleration is 1.50m/s2. It is clearly seen that
the inclusion of soil medium in the analysis decreases the maximum acceleration value to
0.9m/s2. On the other hand, the differences in the values of accelerations are more obvious in
the middle part of the structure.
Fig. 9. Comparisons of accelerations at middle of the structure - Point D with EQ 2

233
Fig. 10. Comparisons of accelerations at top of the structure - Point D with EQ 2
On the other hand, the effects of second earthquake record EQ2 on time histories of
acceleration reveal different conclusions. The maximum acceleration at the top of the
structure is around 0.04m/s2 which is much smaller than the acceleration value from EQ1.
Moreover, the bigger acceleration values are observed at the top of the structure. This shows
the effects of frequencies in the overall structural response. For the sake of completeness,
next the displacement values are compared in Fig. 11-14.
g 11. Comparisons of displacement at middle of the structure - Point D with EQ 1

Fig.
Fig. 12. Comparisons of displacement at middle of the structure - Point E with EQ 1

234
When comparing the displacement time histories concerning earthquake records EQ1 and
EQ2 it can be concluded that the displacements are decreased when soil medium is simulated
in the analysis. Moreover, in EQ2 simulations the values are bigger in the results of
displacement values at top of the structure.
Fig. 13. Comparisons of displacement at middle of the structure - Point D with EQ 2
Fig. 14. Comparisons of displacement at middle of the structure - Point E with EQ 2
When the two natural vibration frequencies of the structure considering the presence of soil
medium are observed it is evident that foundation conditions influence the frequency values.
Basically, a frame with smaller value of frequency means that it vibrates more slowly during
an earthquake which results in lower excitation frequency as given in Table 2.
Table 2. Frequencies of the frame structure considering different ground conditions

Vibration mode Ground Conditions
(Hz) Fixed Base SSI
1st mode 0.80 0.51
2nd mode 2.50 1.18
235
The energy dissipation effect of dampers gets worse as the excitation frequency reduces.
Consequently, when the foundation of viscous dampers becoming softer, the energy
dissipation system shows less effective behaviour. The above statement is confirmed with
the hysteretic force-displacement relationship of the VD installed in the bottom storey and
presented in Fig.15. It can be seen from the figure that along with the foundation softening,
the hysteretic loops become bigger and flatter. This shows the importance of the selection of
damping elements in the overall system.
Figure 15. Force-displacement relationship for viscous damper for fixed base and different
types of soil
CONCLUSIONS
Calculation analysis of the frame structure resting on different types of soil media allowed to
find out that the structural response depends greatly on the soil stiffness characteristics. The
soil structure interaction calculations show that it is crucial to know the soil conditions in
analysis and design of the structures resting on soil media. On the other hand, the influence
of dampers present in the frame structure has advantageous effects when designed carefully.
The unbounded soil boundary conditions are considered to be of infinite elements which
236
simulate the boundaries in such a way that no boundaries are reflected back. The results
obtained from the analysis show that two earthquakes EQ1 and EQ2 although obtained from
the same spectrum have different effects on the overall structural response.
REFERENCES
Akkar S, Sandikkaya MA, Bommer JJ (2014b) Empirical ground-motion models for point- and
extendedsource crustal Earthquake scenarios in Europe and the Middle East, B. Earthq Eng
12:359–387.
Barone G., Navarra G. and Pirrotta A. (2008). Probabilistic response of linear structures equipped
with nonlinear damper devices. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics. 23:2,125-133.
Bindi D, Massa M, Luzi L, Ameri G, Pacor F, Puglia R, Augliera P (2014) Pan-European ground-
motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5 %-
damped PSA at spectral periods up to 3.0 s using the RESORCE dataset. Bull Earthq Eng
12(1):391–430. doi:10.1007/ s10518-_013-_9525-_5.
[Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Atkinson GM (2014) NGA-West 2 equations for predicting PGA,
PGV, and 5 %-damped PSA for shallow crustal Earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 30(3):1057–1085.
doi:10.1193/070113EQS184M.
Bogdanovic, A., K. Edip, and M. Stojmanovska,(2016) Simulation of soil structure interaction
problems considering material properties, Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 3(2):
p. 132-139.
Bogdanovic, A. (2014), Optimal damper placement in steel frame structures, . PhD Thesis, Ss. Cyril
and Methodius: Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology.
Chiou BS-J, Youngs RR (2014) Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA model for the average
horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthq Spectra 30(3):1117–
1153. doi:10.1193/072813EQS219M.
Dicleli M. and Mehta A. (2007). Seismic performance of chevron braced steel frames with and
without viscous fluid dampers as a function of ground motion and damper. Constructional Steel
Research. 63:8,1102-1115.
Milutinovic, Z., R. Salic, N. Dumurdzanov, V. Cejkovska, L. Pekevski, D. Tomic (2016). Seismic
Zoning Maps for Republic of Macedonia according the Requirements of MKS-EN 1998-1:2004
- Eurocode 8, IZIIS Report, 2016-$XJXVWɆɄɋ(1-ɇȺ
237
6WUXþQLUDG
UDK 624.152
ANALIZA IZ0(5(1,+,,=5$ý81$7,+
POMERANJA DIJAFRAGME ZA OBJEKAT
CRPNE STANICE
0DULMDâüHNLü**, 3HWDU6DQWUDþ*, äHOMNR%DMLü**
** GeoEXPERT DOO Subotica

* *UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHWX6XERWLFL816(PDLOsantrac@gf.uns.ac.rs
REZIME
U radu su prikazani rezultati SURUDþXQDpomeranja armiranobetonske dijafragme za objekat
crpne stanice LQMLKRYRSRUHÿHQMHVDL]PHUHQLPYUHGQRVWLPDSRPHUDQMD3URUDþXQXWLFDMDQD
$%GLMDIUDJPXMHL]YUãHQXJHRWHKQLþNRPVRIWYHUX GeoStudioGRNMHSUDüHQMHSRPHUDQMD
YUãHQRSRPRüXLQNOLQRPHWDUD&USQDVWDQLFDVOXåL]DSRWUHEHRGYRÿHQMDDWPRVIHUVNLKYRGD
sa dela sliva stambeno poslovnog kompleksa Beograd na vodi. Zbog velike dubine i
QHSRVUHGQHEOL]LQHUHNH6DYHLVNRSüHVHYUãLWLpod zaštitom AB dijafragme. Dno iskopa je
ispod nivoa podzemne vode, koja je u funkciji nivoa reke Save i Dunava. 3URUDþXQMHXUDÿHQ
za drenirane uslove. Nivo podzemne vode je oboren 0.5m ispod dna temeljne jame. Sniženje
podzemne vode, iskop temeljne jame i njena zaštita su uspešno izvedeni prema projektu.
./-8ý1(5(ý,armiranobetonska dijafragma, inklinometri, temeljna jama
ANALYSIS OF MEASURED AND CALCULATED

MOVEMENTS OF DIAPHRAGM WALL FOR PUMPING
STATION
ABSTRACT
The paper presents the results of the calculation displacement of reinforced concrete
diaphragm wall for pumping station and its comparison with measured displacement values.
The calculation of the behaviour of the RC diaphragm wall was performed in geotechnical
software GeoStudio, while the displacement monitoring was performed by inclinometers. The
pumping station will be used for drainage of atmospheric water from the part of residential-
business complex “Belgrade Waterfront”. Due to the great depth of the foundation pit and
the proximity of the Sava river, the excavation is protected with RC diaphragm wall. The
bottom of the excavation is below the groundwater level. The Groundwater is in the function
of levels of Sava and Danube river. The calculation was made for drained conditions. The
groundwater level was lowered 0.5m below the bottom of the foundation pit. Lowering of the
groundwater level, pit excavation and its protection were successfully carried out according
to the designed documentation.
KEYWORDS: ground water lowering, inclinometers, pit excavation

238
UVOD
Predmetni objekat, crpna stanica CS1, se gradi u Beogradu na lokaciji sBeograd na vodis,
SDUDOHOQR]HPXQVNRPSXWXL]PHÿXDXWREXVNHVWDQLFHLVDYVNRJPRVWD (Slika 1). Za izgradnju
REMHNWDFUSQHVWDQLFH&6SUHGYLÿHQDMH]DãWLWDWHPHOMQHMDPH$%GLMDIUDJPRPNRMHVX
SR VWDWLþNRP VLVWHPX HODVWLþQR XNOMHãWHQH X WOX D X JRUQMHP QLYRX UD]XSUWH – slobodno
oslonjene.
*DEDULWQH GLPHQ]LMH FUSQH VWDQLFH &6 VX [P 'RQMD LYLFD WHPHOMQH SORþH &6
odnosno dno iskopa je na 67.75m. Dijafragme se rade sa dna radnog platoa na 75.1m što je
od kote terena (r0.00 { 77.0m) niže za cca 2.0m. Gabaritne dimenzije AB dijafragme su
15.1x16.6m, dužina dijafragme je 15.0m, debljina je 0.60m, beton je MB30, a armatura
B500B (Slika 1).
Teren na predmetnoj lokaciji pripada aluvionu reke Save i Dunava, na kojem je antropogeni
QDVXWLVORM]QDWQHGHEOMLQHIRUPLUDQRGPHãDYLQHWODLJUDÿHYLQVNRJRWSDGDNRPDGDEHWRQD
opeke i crepa). Objekat se nalazi neposredno uz desnu obalu reke Save, na oko 1.6km od
XãüDXUHNX'XQDY $SVROXWQDNRWDWHUHQDQDORNDFLMLMHL]PHÿX75.8 i 77.4m n.v.
Slika 1. Temeljna jama

Figure 1. Pit excavation
7RNRPJHRWHKQLþNLKLVWUDåQLKUDGRYD13-16.10.2017. god. (Geoexpert doo, Subotica) nivo

podzemne vode je bio na koti 71.0-72.0mnv ili na dubini od 5.0-5.8m od QHXMHGQDþHQH
površine terena. Nivo podzemne vode je promenljiv i sezonski i godišnje i u direktnoj je
KLGUDXOLþNRMYH]LVDQLYRPUHNH6DYH. =DSURUDþXQXVYRMHQMHUHåLPYLVRNLKYRGDQDUHFL6DYL
(73.5m | 2.0m od kote terena).
239
Na osnovu rezultata terenskih istražnih radova i laboratorijskih ispitivanja uzoraka tla, na

GDWRMORNDFLMLMHXWYUÿHQDUHODWLYQRXMHGQDþHQDVORMHYLWRVWWHUHQD*HQHUDOno se mogu izdvojiti
VOHGHüLOLWRORãNLþODQRYL
- NASIP - u površinskom delu je kolovozni sloj i kaldrma cca8-FP ,GXüL QDQLåH GR
SRGLQHNRMDVHQDOD]LL]PHÿX-PQDVLSþLQHSUDãLQHSHVNRYLWHLSRGUHÿHQRJOLQRYLWH
Generalno, sloj je L]UD]LWRKHWHURJHQSRVDVWDYXLPHKDQLþNLPVYRMVWYLPD]ERJþHJDVHPRåH
smatrati vodopropusnim.
- GLINA (CH) - YLVRNRSODVWLþQDWYUGR-SODVWLþQHNRQ]LVWHQLFLMHSUDãLQDVWR-peskovita, sivo-

žute boje. Podina sloja je na dubini oko 11.0m. Vodopropusnost sloja je niska.
- GLINA (CH) - YLVRNRSODVWLþQDWYUGR-SODVWLþQHNRQ]LVWHQLFLMHSUDãLQDVWR-peskovita, sivo-

plave boje. Podina sloja nije dosegnuta do dubine od 21.0m od površine terena.
Vodopropusnost sloja je vrlo niska.
3525$ý8187,&$-$1$$%',-$)5$*MU
3URUDþXQXWLFDMDQD$%GLMDIUDJPXMHL]YUãHQXJHRWHKQLþNRPVRIWYHUX*HR6WXGLR3URJUDP
YUãL DQDOL]X ]D UDYDQVNR VWDQMH GHIRUPDFLMD 8 SURJUDPX VH NRULVWL PHWRGD NRQDþQLK
HOHPHQDWD þLML VH osnovni princip sastoji X SRGHOL UD]PDWUDQRJ SRGUXþMD QD NRQDþDQ EURM
PDQMLK SRGUXþMD RGQRVQR HOHPHQDWD WDNR GD VH DQDOL]RP SRMHGLQLK HOHPHQDWD X]
SUHWSRVWDYNX R QMLKRYRM PHÿXVREQRM SRYH]DQRVWL DQDOL]LUD FHOLQD Tlo se modelira kao
elasto-SODVWLþDQ PDWHULMDO VD 0RKU-Coulombovim zakonom loma do cca 68.6m - sloj 1
(nasip), i kao modifikovan Cam-Clay model – sloj 2 i 3 (glina CH) (Slika 2).
5DþXQVNL SDUDPHWUL þYUVWRüH L GHIRUPDELOQRVWL VX XVYRMHQL QD RVQRYX UH]XOWDWD GDWLK X
HODERUDWX R JHRWHKQLþNLP XVORYLPD L]JUDGQMH (*-061/17, novembar 2017, GeoEXPERT
doo, Subotica).
3URUDþXQMHXUDÿHQ]DGUHQLUDQHXVORYH1LYRYRGHMHRERUHQSUHSRþHWNDSUYHID]HLQDLVWRP
je nivou u svim fazama.
,PDMXüLXYLGX]DãWLWQLVORMEHWRQDRGFPVDREHVWUDQHLVODELMLNYDOLWHWEHWRQDX]DãWLWQRP
sloju zbog kontakta sa bentRQLWQRP VXVSHQ]LMRP L WOX ]D SURUDþXQ LGHDOQRJ EHWRQVNRJ
preseka je usvojena debljina dijafragme od 50cm (J=0.010m4). Istovremeno, za modul
HODVWLþQRVWL EHWRQD MH XVYRMHQD QLåD YUHGQRVW RG (E *3D NRMD RGJRYDUD YUHPHQX
NUDüHPRGGDQD
Tokom gradnje AB dijafragme javljaju se promene naponskih stanja u tlu i samoj dijafragmi,
SULþHPXGROD]LGRSRPHUDQMDPDVDWOD– deformacija (Slika 2).
240
Slika 2. 1XPHULþNLPRGHOLGHIRUPLVDQDPUHåDNRQDþQLKHOHPHQDWD(zone pomaranja tla)

Figure 2. Numerical model and deformed finite element mesh (soil displacement zone)
241
3URUDþXQMHYUãHQSRNDUDNWHULVWLþQLPID]DPD u kojima dolazi do bitnih promena naponskih

stanja u dijafragmi. 3URUDþXQRP MH REXKYDüHQR 6 ID]D GHOLPLþQL LVNRSL L]JUDGQMD
dijafragme SRVWDYOMDQMHUD]XSLUDþD 5H]XOWDWLSURUDþXQDSRPHUDQMDGDWLVXJUDILþNL6OLND
3 i 4 ).
Slika 3. Dijagram horizontalnog pomeranja Figure 3. Diagram of horizontal displacements
Slika 4. Dijagram momenata savijanja Figure 4. Diagram of bending moments
Dijagrami su prikazani po fazama gradnje, tj. prikazani su uticaji i deformacije u u toku

vremena - RGSRþHWNDGR]DYUãHWNDLVNRSDWHPHOMQHMDPH3ULWRPHYUHPHQDGLMDJUDPX
QH SUHGVWDYOMD UHDOQR YUHPH JUDGQMH QHJR þLVWR služi za definisanje faza.
242
Maksimalna,apsolutna, UDþXQVNDSRPHUDQMDGLMDIUDJPHXNDUDNWHULVWLþQRPSUDYFXL]QRVH
oko 31.0mm.
INKLINOMETARSKA MERENJA
1DVYDNRMVWDQL&6SULEOLåQRXODPHOXQDVUHGLQLVWUDQLFHXGLMDIUDJPXMHSRGXåLQLXJUDÿHQD
þHOLþQD ]DãWLWQD FHY X NRMX MH QDNRQ RþYUãüDYDQMD EHWRQD XJUDÿHQD LQNOLQRPHWDUVND FHY
Merenje inklinometra je izvršeno sa opremom GK-640D. Merenje je vršeno u ortogonalnoj
ravni A-$¶ WDNR ãWR MH PHPRULVDQD LQNOLQDFLMD QD VYDNLK P LGXüL RG GQD ND YUKX
inklinometarske cevi.
Slika 5. Inklinometarska cev Figure 5. Inclinometer casing
Na slici 6. VX SULND]DQL XSRUHGQL JUDILþNL SULND]L SRPHUDQMD GRELMHQLK SRPRüX VRIWYHUD
GeoStudio i pomeranja dobijenih preko inklinometarskih merenja. ,QOLQRPHWDUVND þLWDQMD
pokazuju relativna pomeranja-promenu nagiba dijafragme u odnosu na vertikalu. Za potrebe
SRUHÿenja rezultata, ukupna pomeranja dobijena programom GeoStudio su svedena na
relativna, tako što su oduzeta pomeranja dna dijafragme. Da bi se prilikom merenja dobila
apsolutna pomeranja neophodno je da se, pored inklinometarskih merenja, pomeranje
dijafragme prati i geodetskim putem.
௭ୀ௅
‫ݑ‬௚ > ‫ݑ‬௜ ֜ ‫ ீݑ = ݑ‬െ ‫׬‬௭ୀ଴ ߮݀‫ݔ‬
Gde je: ‫ݑ‬, ‫ݑ‬௚ , ‫ݑ‬௜ െ apsolutno (ukupno), geodetsko i inklinometarsko pomeranje
߮ െ nagib dijafragme - inklinometarske cevi
L - dužina dijafragme
243
Slika 6. 5DþXQVNDLL]Perena pomeranja – inklinometri 1-4

Figure 6. Calculated and measured displacements – inclinometers 1-4
Relativna rDþXQVNDSRPHUDQMDGLMDIUDJPHXNDUDNWHULVWLþQRPSUDYFXL]QRVHRNRPP
0DNVLPDOQDL]PHUHQDSRPHUDQMDVHNUHüXXJUDQLFDPDRG-11.9mm.
244
=$./-8ý$.
8UDGXVXSULND]DQLUH]XOWDWLSURUDþXQDSRPHUDQMDDUPLUDQREHWRQVNHGLMDIUDJPHLQMLKRYR
SRUHÿHQMH VD L]PHUHQLP YUHGQRVWLPD SRPHUDQMD 5DþXQVND SRPHUDQMD GLMDIUDJPH X
NDUDNWHULVWLþQRPSUDYFXWMSUDYFXSRPHUDQMDSUDYDFXSUDYDQQDGLMDIUDJPXL]QRVHRNR
PP0DNVLPDOQDL]PHUHQDSRPHUDQMDVHNUHüXXJUDQLFDPDRG-11.9mm.
3ULOLNRPSURUDþXQDWORMHPRGHOLUDQRDSURNVLPLUDQRNDRPRGLfikovan Cam-Clay model koji

je primenjiv za normalno konsolidovane i malo pre-NRQVROLGRYDQH]DVLüHQHJOLQH,]DQDOL]H
UH]XOWDWDSURUDþXQDLLQNOLQRPHWDUVNLKPHUHQMDYLGLVHGDRYDMPRGHORGJRYDUDNRQNUHWQRM
problematici. ,]YHVQDPDODRGVWXSDQMDL]PHÿXUDþXQVNLKLL]PHUHQLKYUHGQRVWLSRPHUDQMD
PRJXVHRSUDYGDWLWLPHãWRVRIWYHU*HR6WXGLRREUDÿXMHUDYDQVNLSUREOHP'GRNMHUHDOQR
stanje trodimenzionalno 8WLFDML X UDYDQVNRP PRGHOX VX YHüL UDYDQVNR VWDQMH QDSRQD L
deformacija je na strani sigurnosti.
Sa JUDILþNRJ SULND]D LQNOLQRPHWDUVNLK PHUHQMD SRPHUDQMD GLMDIUDJPH NDR L L] DSVROXWQLK

SRPHUDQMD GRELMHQLK SUHNR VRIWYHUD *HR6WXGLR PRåH VH ]DNOMXþLWL GD VH GQR GLMDIUDJPH
pomera. IQOLQRPHWDUVNDþLWDQMDXWRP VOXþDMXSRND]XMXUHODWLYQDSRPHUDQMD-promenu nagiba
dijafragme u odnosu na vertikalu. Ovaj problem se može rešiti geodetskim snimanjem
pomeranja naglavice LOLWDþNHQDGQXWHPHOMQHMDPHXodnosu na neki reper, što bi u zbiru sa
inklinometarskim merenjima trebalo dati apsolutna pomeranja.
%XGXüLGDVXL]YUãHQDVDPRLQNOLQRPHWDUVNDLVSLWLYDQMDSRPHUDQMDEH]JHRGHWVNRJSUDüHQMD
SRPHUDQMDQDJODYLFH]DSRWUHEHSRUHÿHQMDUH]XOWDWDXNXSQDSRPHUDQMDGRELMHQDSURJUDPRP
GeoStudio su svedena na relativna, tako što su oduzeta pomeranja dna dijafragme.
Prvo mereQMHLQNOLQRPHWURPQXOWRPHUHQMHL]YUãHQRMHQDNRQGHOLPLþQRJLVNRSDWHPHOMQH
MDPHNDGDMHYHüGRãORGRL]YHVQLKSRPHUDQMD'DELVHRQDMSUREOHPSULOLNRPSRUHÿHQMD
rezultata anulirao, deformacije su u programu uzete u obzir RGWUHüH ID]HWMRGGHOLPLþQRJ
iskopa.
LITERATURA
*HRPHKDQLþNLHODERUDW(*-061/2017, za objekat crpne stanice u Beogradu - Beograd na vodi,

GeoEXPERT doo Subotica, Novembar 2017
GeoStudio 2012, User Manual, GEO-SLOPE INTERNATIONAL, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
245
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.138
PRIMENA TEHNIKA STABILIZACIJE TLA U

5(â$9$1-8*(27(+1,ý.,+352%/(0$
1HPDQMD0DULQNRYLü(OHIWHULMD=ODWDQRYLü,
NeERMãD'DYLGRYLü, =RUDQ%RQLü1LNROD5RPLü
University of Niš, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture of Niš,
Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, Niš, Serbia, nemanja.gaf@gmail.com,
elefterija2006@yahoo.com, dnebojsa21@gmail.com, zokibon@yahoo.com,
romicnikola@yahoo.com
REZIME
Priroda nam ne daje uvek zahtevane uslove za izgradnju. Kod tla koja svojim svojstvima ne
mogu zadovoljiti minimalne zahteve u pogledu nosivosti i kvaliteta neophodno je sprovesti
postupak stabilizacije i poboljšanja nosivosti. Da bi se izabrala adekvatna tehnika
stabilizacije, neophodno je najpre pravilno sagledati problem i otkriti uzrok njegovog
QDVWDQND0HWRGDNRMDüHGDWLQDMEROMHUH]XOWDWH]DYLVLRGYUVWHWODORNDFLMHi namene objekta
NRML üH VH JUDGLWL 8 UDGX MH GDW SULND] WHKQLND NRMH VH NRULVWH VD FLOMHP SREROMãDQMD
karakteristika tla i njegove stabilizacije u zavisnosti od JHRWHKQLþNLK problema koje treba
rešiti.
./-8ý1(5(ý,stabilizacija tla, poboljšanje nosivosti, JHRWHKQLþNLSUREOHPL
APPLICATION OF SOIL STABILIZATION

TECHNIQUES IN SOLVING GEOTECHNICAL
PROBLEMS
ABSTRACT
Nature does not always give us the required conditions for construction. For soils, which by
their properties do not meet the minimum requirements regarding load-bearing capacity and
quality, the process of soil stabilization and ground improvement is needed to be carried out.
In order to select an appropriate stabilization technique, it is necessary to consider the
problem properly and to determine the cause of its occurrence. The method that will give the
best results depends on the type of soil, the location of the site and the purpose of the structure
to be built. The paper presents the techniques for ground improvement and soil stabilization
depending on geotechnical problems that have to be solved.
KEY WORDS: soil stabilization, ground improvement, geotechnical problems

246
UVOD
3RMDP VWDELOL]DFLMH WOD REXKYDWD WHKQLNH NRMH VH VSURYRGH UDGL SREROMãDQMD IL]LþNLK L
PHKDQLþNLKVYRMVWDYD tla i NRMHRPRJXüXMXEH]EHGQXL]JUDGQMXREMHNDWDUD]OLþLWLKQDPHQD
(Chu i sar., 2009). Tehnike poboljšanja mogu biti privremene ili trajne. Kod privremenih
tehnika, HIHNWLSREROMãDQMDVYRMVWDYDWODWUDMXUHODWLYQRNUDWNRQDMþHãüHVDPRXID]LL]JUDGQMH
objekata, npr.sniženje NPV, zamrzavanje tla), dok VHXGUXJRPVOXþDMXHIHNWL]DGUåDYDMXNUR]
duži YUHPHQVNL SHULRG QSU LQMHNWLUDQMH DUPLUDQMH GLQDPLþNR ]ELMDQMH -HYUHPRYLü L
.RVWLü. 3REROMãDQMHLVWDELOL]DFLMDWODREXKYDWDRNRUD]OLþLWLKPHWRGDWUHWLUDQMDWOD
XNOMXþXMXüL ]DPHQX PDWHULMDOD KHPLMVNH SURPHQH RMDþDQMH DUPDWXURP LOL JHRVintetikom,
dreniranje, zbijanje vibracijama, konsolidaciju, upotrebu elektroosmoze, i drugo (Phear i
Harris, 2008). 7DNRÿHPQRJHWHKQLNHVHNRULVWHXNRPELQDFLMLVDGUXJLPDDNDRUH]XOWDW
mogu nastati neke nove metode. Metode i tehnike poboljšanja svojstava tla mogu se svrstati
XþHWLULRVQRYQHJUXSHPHKDQLþNRSREROMãDQMHIL]LþNRLKHPLMVNRSREROMãDQMHKLGUDXOLþNR
poboljšanje i poboljšanje upotrebom geosintetika (Tiwari i Kumawat, 2014). Pored toga,
þHVWR VH X WRNX L]JUDGQMH NRULVWH tehnike opažanja, kako bi se pratila uspešnost pojedine
PHWRGHLOLRPRJXüLOHHYHQWXDOQRSRWUHEQHL]PHQHQSUNRGPHWRGHSUHGRSWHUHüHQMDSUDWLVH
sleganje). Nakon primene neke od metoda može se pratiti njena uspešnost i postignuti efekti
(npr. terensko ispitivanje vodopropusnosti kao kriterijum za ocenu uspešnosti injektiranja,
SPT ili CPT kod vibroflotacije) -HYUHPRYLüL.RVWLü. U nastavku su prikazane metode
koje se koriste kako bi se poboljšale karakteristike tla, pre svega njegova nosivost i stabilnost.
0(+$1,ý.232%2/-â$1-(7/$
3REROMãDQMH NYDOLWHWD PDWHULMDOD L QRVLYRVWL WOD VH PRåH SRVWLüL GHOLPLþQLP LOL SRWSXQLP
uklanjanjem tla slabijih karakteristika i zamenom kvalitetnijim materijalom. Tehnike
PHKDQLþNH VWDELOL]DFLMH L SREROMãDQMD WOD ]DYLVH RG WHUenskih uslova i zahtevaju prethodna
LVWUDåLYDQMD L NRQWUROX NYDOLWHWD XJUDÿHQRJ PDWHULMDOD -HYUHPRYLü L .RVWLü .
0HKDQLþND VWDELOL]DFLMD LPD ]D FLOM SRYHüDQMH JXVWLQH WOD GHORYDQMHP QHNH VSROMDãQMH VLOH
(Chu i sar., 2009). Koristi se kao priprema terena sa ciljem poboljšanja svojstava tla pre
gradnje novih objekata. U okviru ove tehnike razlikuju se plitko (površinsko) i duboko
]ELMDQMH8VSHãQRVWSULPHQHRYLKPHWRGD]DYLVLRGYUVWHWODLQMHJRYRJVWHSHQD]DVLüHQRVWL
kao i od nivoa podzemne vode (Phear i Harris, 2008).
7HKQLNHPHKDQLþNRJSREROMãDQMDVYRMVWDYDWODQDOD]HSULPHQXSULL]JUDGQMLXOLFDDHURGURPD
OXND EUDQD QDVLSD NRG SULSUHPH WOD ]D WHPHOMH NRG L]YRÿHQMD QDVLSD L]D SRWSRUQLK
konstrukcija i sl. -HGDQRGNOMXþQLKHIHNDWDSRVWXSND]ELjanja jeste VSUHþDYDQMHSRMDYHYHOLkih
sleganja i likvefakcije (Tiwari i Kumawat, 2014). 0HKDQLþNDVWDELOL]DFLMDWODLPDQHGRVWDWNH
u pogledu velikog utroška materijala i dužeg vremena gradnje.
Plitko (površinsko) zbijanje tla
3OLWNR SRYUãLQVNR ]ELMDQMH WOD PRåH ELWL VWDWLþNR LOL GLQDPLþNR 8JODYQRP VH NRULVWL ]D
ãOMXQNRYLWD L SHVNRYLWD WOD NRMD VH ODNãH ]ELMDMX X SRWSXQR ]DVLüHQRP LOL SRWSXQR VXYRP
stanju. Postoji veliki izbor sredstava mehanizacije (valjci, ježevi) za njeno VSURYRÿHQMHNRMD
247
VHUD]OLNXMXSRYHOLþLQLREOLNXLQDþLQXUDGDKod sitnozrnog tla koristi se statiþND metoda

zbijanjaGRNVH]DNUXSQR]UQDWODNRULVWLGLQDPLþNDPHWRGD]ELMDQMDNa Slici 1 prikazana je
PHKDQL]DFLMDNRMDVHQDMþHãüH koristi za stabilizaciju tla ovom tehnikom.
Slika 1. Mašine za plitko zbijanje tla: a) vibro-QDELMDþEvLEURSORþDF valjak na gumenim

WRþNRYLPDG vibracioni jež
Figure 1. Machines for shallow compaction of soil: a) vibrating tamper; b) vibrating plate;
c) pneumatic-tyred roller; d) tamping roller
Duboko zbijanje tla
2YDMWLS]ELMDQMDWODSRVWLåHVHSUHWKRGQLPRSWHUHüLYDQMHPWODSUHGRSWHUHüHQMHPSULPHQRP

HNVSOR]LYDGLQDPLþNRPNRQVROLGDFLMRPLOLzbijanjem vibracijom. 3UHWKRGQRRSWHUHüHQMHLPD
]D FLOM NRQVROLGDFLMX WOD SUH L]JUDGQMH QHNRJ REMHNWD þLPH VH VPDQMXMH VOHJDQMH NRMH VH
RþHNXMH nakon izgradnje (Chu i sar., 2014ýHVWRVHPHWRGDSUHNRQVROLGDFLMHSULPHQMXMHX
kombinaciji sa vertikalnim dreniranjem (Slika 2). Ova metoda se koristi prilikom izgradnje
]JUDGDQDVLSDVDREUDüDMQLFDLGUXJLKREMHNDWD
a) b)
Slika 2. Stabilizacija tla: a) prekonsolidacijom; b) prekonsolidacijom u kombinaciji sa vertikalnim

drenovima (Stapelfeldt, 2010)
Figure 2. Soil stabilization: a) preconsolidation/precompression; b) preconsolidation in combination
with vertical drains (Stapelfeldt, 2010)
'LQDPLþNDNRQVROLGDFLMDMHPHWRGDNRGNRMHVHWHãNLmaljevi spuštaju s velike visine i na taj

QDþLQYUãH]ELMDQMHWOD (Slika 3). Ona je svoju primenu pronašla prvenstveno pri izgradnji
VDREUDüDMQLFD NDNR EL VH XEU]DR SURFHV NRQVROLGDFLMH SRGWOD L RPRJXüLOD EU]D L HILNDVQD
izrada naknadnih slojeva.
248
Slika 3. 3ULPHQDGLQDPLþNHNRQVROLGDFLMHWODSULL]JUDGQMLREMHNDWDX'XEDL-u
Figure 3. Application of the dynamic consolidation of soil at a construction site in Dubai
+,'5$8/,ý.232%2/-â$1-(7/$
PR]QDWR MH GD YRGD LPD ]QDþDMDQ XWLFDM QD stabilnost objekata L]JUDÿHQLK X WOX LOL RG WOD
3UREOHPLNRMLVHMDYOMDMXXWOXVXYUORþHVWRYH]DQL]DSRYHüDQi sadržaj vode u tlu, što za
SRVOHGLFXLPDSRYHüDQL porni pritisak, smanjene efektivnHQDSRQHSRYHüDQXWHåLQXWODNDR
i smanjenu VPLþXüX þYUVWRüX, što rezultuje pojavom nestabilnosti terena. U zavisnosti od
YUVWH SRGORJH XNROLNR MH WR QHRSKRGQR SULPHQMXMH VH MHGQD RG PHWRGD KLGUDXOLþNRJ
poboljšanja tla koje obuhvataju snižavanje NPV, preusmeravanje toka vode, smanjenje
vlažnosti materijala ili isušivanje tla putem elektroosmoze kod sitnozrnog tla. Prema nekim
autorima 0LWFKHOO 0LFLü Chu i sar., 2009; Tiwari i Kumawat, 2014)
HOHNWURNLQHWLþNRWUHWLUDQMHWOD SULSDGDJUXSLKHPLMVNLKPHWRGDVWDELOL]DFLMHWODSDüHRQMemu
ELWLYLãHUHþHQRXQDVWDYNXUDGD
1DMMHGQRVWDYQLML L QDMMHIWLQLML QDþLQ GUHQLUDQMD MH VQLåDYDQMH 139 RGYRÿHQMHP vode iz

SRGUXþMD SUHGYLÿHQRJ ]D JUDGQMX SULPHQRP drenažnih jama, kanala, rovova, bunara,
iglofiltera i horizontalnih drenova (Slika 4).
Slika 6QLåHQMH139NRULãüHQMHPDEXQDUDE kanala; c) iglofiltera

Figure 4. Lowering groundwater table using: a) wells; b) channel; c) wellpoints
U sitnozrnom tlu gravitaciona drenaža traje veoma dugo i ne daje željene rezultate, pa se zato
þHVWR kombinuje sa metodom prethodne konsolidacije (Slika 2b).
249
0HUD GUHQLUDQMD WDNRÿH VH NRULVWL L ]D VWDELOL]DFLMX SULURGQLK L YHãWDþNLK NRVLQD (Slika 5),
VPDQMHQMHSULWLVDNDQDSRWSRUQHNRQVWUXNFLMHVPDQMHQMHVWLãOMLYRVWLWODVSUHþDYDQMHHUR]LMH
spreþDYDQMHLOLXPDQMHQMHXWLFDMDVPU]DYDQMDWOD 'DYLGRYLü Prilikom izgradnje treba
YRGLWLUDþXQDGDVHVQLåHQMHP139QHL]D]RYXãWHWQDVOHJDQMDRNROQLKREMHNDWD
Slika 5. Primena drenažnih mera u stabilizaciji kosina

Figure 5. Application of drainage measures in stabilization of slopes
),=,ý.2,+(0,-6.232%2/-â$1-(7/$
8 SRVWXSNH VWDELOL]DFLMH VODER QRVLYLK WOD SRUHG QDYHGHQLK VSDGDMX L WHKQLNH IL]LþNRJ L
hemijskog tretiranja tla þLMRP se primenom poboljšava nosivost. U ovu grupu tehnika spadaju
WHUPLþNo tretitanje tla, injektiranje, stabilizacija dodavanjem veziva L HOHNWURNLQHWLþNa
stabilizacija tla. Metode ovog tipa imaju široku primenu. Koriste se za stabilizaciju tla pri
izgradnji podzemnih objekata, nasipa, VDREUDüDMQLFDNDRLNRGstabilizacije kosina.
7HUPLþNRWUHWLUDQMHWOD
3RGWHUPLþNLPWUHWLUDQMHPWODVHSRGUD]XPHYD]DJUHYDQMH(Slika 6a) ili zamrzavanje tla (Slika

6b) sa ciljem poboljšanja njegove nosivosti.
Zagrevanje doprinosi trajnim SURPHQDPDVYRMVWDYDWODLþLQLPDWHULMDOþYUãüLPLL]GUåOMLYLMLP

7HUPLþNR WUHWLUDQMH WOD RG JOLQRYLWRJ PDWHULMDOD QD RNR & NDR UH]XOWDW GDMH ]QDþDMQR
poboljšanje fizLþNLKLPHKDQLþNLKsvojstava (Slika 6a) (Tiwari i Kumawat, 2014).
Zamrzavanje tla odvija se u dve faze - aktivno i pasivno. Aktivno zamrzavanje se odnosi na
VWYDUDQMH OHGHQRJ ]LGD RGUHÿHQH GHEOMLQH SUL þHPX SRVWURMHQMH ]D KODÿHQMH UDGL YHOLNLP
250
kapacitetom. 3DVLYQR ]DPU]DYDQMH SRGUD]XPHYD VSUHþDYDQMH RWDSDQMD L RGUåDYDQMH

postignute debljine zida. Efikasnost zamrzavanja zavisi od prisustva vode za stvaranje leda.
0HWRGDVHPRåHL]YHVWLXNROLNRMHWOR]DVLüHQR YRGRP8VOXþDMXGDWORQLMH]DVLüHQR, najpre
treba izvršiti njegovo kvašenje. =DPU]DYDQMHPVHSRVWLåHSRYHüDQMH]DSremine za oko 9%.
Efekat zamrzavanja zavisi od temperature zamrzavanja, sadržaja vode u tlu i prirode tla (Slika
6b).
Slika 6. a) Zagrevanje tla; b) Zamrzavanje tla

Figure 6. a) Soil heating; b) Soil freezing
Injektiranje tla
Pod injektiranjem se podrazumeva ubrizgavanje pod pritiskom injekcione mase u tlo u svrhu
SREROMãDQMDQMHJRYLKNDUDNWHULVWLND3RVWRMHUD]OLþLWLSRVWXSFLLQMHNWLUDQMDPHÿXNRMLPD³MHW
grouting“ sistem ili mlazno injektiranje tla GDQDVQDOD]LVYHYHüXSULPHQXu svetu i kod nas.
Ovaj in situ sistem predstavlja vrlo efikasnu PHUX JHRWHKQLþNH PHOLRUDFLMH i može se
primenjivati u najrazliþitijim uslovima graÿenja i u gotovo svim vrstama tla (Slika 7a).
Postoji moguünost koriãüenja bilo kog tipa veziva kao injekcione mase, ali u praksi najþeãüu
primenu imaju vodocementne mešavine, dok se u cilju postizanja vodonepropustljivosti tla
najþeãüe koristi mešavina vode, cementa i bentonita (koloidne gline).
Suština tehnologije je u upotrebi mlaza cementnog veziva koji pod pritiskom razbija strukturu
tla i meša se sa njim, formirajuüi tako stub saþinjen od mešavine tretiranog tla i cementa
(Slika 7b), koji se odlikuje visokom þvrstoüom i niskom vodopropustljivoãüu ývrstoüa i
vodopropustljivost stubova kontroliše se na osnovu vodocementnog faktora, dok preþnik
stubova zavisi od brzine rotacije i izdizanja bušaüeg alata.
Tehnika mlaznog injektiranja tla SUHGVWDYOMDYHRPDEU]VLJXUDQLHNRQRPLþDQSRVWXSDN i ima

veoma ãLURNX SULPHQX X JHRWHKQLþNRP LQåHQMHUVWYX SRG]LÿLYDQMH SRVWRMHüLK SOLWNLK
fundamenata, osiguranje bokova dubokih iskopa, stabilizacija terena oko tunelskog iskopa
(QDURþLWRXWHPHQXtunelskog svoda) ãWRMHRGSRVHEQRJ]QDþDMDNRGprimene metoda iskopa
tunela u punom profilu, kontrola NPV, kao i sanacija kontaminiraniKSRGUXþMa (Zlatanoviü
2009).
251
Slika 7. ”Jet grouting“ tehnologija: a) primena u svim vrstama tla; b) faze injektiranja
Figure 7. ”Jet grouting“ technology: a) application for all soil types; b) stages of grouting procedure
Stabilizacija tla dodavanjem veziva
Hemijska stabilizacija je tehnika poboljšanja inženjerskih svojstava tla kombinovanjem

jednog ili više VWDELOL]DWRUDVDWORPLSUHGVWDYOMDPQRJREUåLLMHIWLQLMLQDþLQRGNODVLþQRJ
XNODQMDQMD L ]DPHQH PDWHULMDOD &HPHQW L NUHþ VX PHÿX SUYLP PDWHULMDOLPD NRML VX VH
primenjivali pri stabilizaciji tla mešanjem sa osnovnim materijalom i pokazali su
zadovoljavajXüHUH]XOWDWHSREROMãDQMDPHKDQLþNLKNDUDNWHULVWLND (Slika 8). Preporuka je da se
NUHþ XJODYQRP NRULVWL NRG NRKHUHQWQLK PDWHULMDOD FHPHQW NRG QHNRKHUHQWQLK L RQLK NRML
predstavljaju prelaz od nekoherentnih prema koherentnim materijalima, a kod nekoherentnih
jednoliko graduiranih materijala koristi se bitumen (Bell, 1996). Sve se više u svetu koriste i
SURL]YRGLQDED]LVLQWHWLþNLK polimernih emulzija, ulja, katrana, bitumena i drugih materijala.
Slika 8. Postupak stabilizacije tla dodavanjem veziva

Figure 8. Process of soil stabilization by adding a binder
ElektroNLQHWLþNDVWDELOL]DFLMDWOD
Sitnozrna tla su najosetljivija na stanje i promenu vlažnosti. U svrhu smanjenja vlažnosti i

SREROMãDQMD NDUDNWHULVWLND WOD GDQDV MH VYH þHãüH X XSRWUHEi i metoda HOHNWURNLQHWLþNH
stabilizacije sitnozrnih tla (Lamont-Black i Weltman, 2010). *UDILþND LQWHUSUHWDFLMD
VXãWLQVNLK SURFHVD NRML VH RGYLMDMX X VLWQR]UQRP JOLQRYLWRP WOX WRNRP HOHNWURNLQHWLþNRJ
tretiranja tla prikazana je na Slici 9. Propuštanjem jednosmerne struje kroz tlo, dolazi do
pojave procesa elektroosmotskog kretanja vode u tlu od anode (pozitivno naelektrisana
252
elektroda) prema katodi (negativno naelektrisana elektroda), što rezultuje opadanjem pornog
SULWLVNDNRMHSRþLQMHX]Rni anode, a onda se širi i u okolno tlo. Rezultat ovog procesa je
smanjivanje vlažnosti tla i porast efektivnih napona u tlu, što za posledicu ima konsolidaciju
tretiranog tla.
7HKQLNDHOHNWURNLQHWLþNRJWUHWLUDQMDWODPRåHELWLXQDSUHÿHQDSULPHQRPKHPLMVNih agenasa
(KHPLMVNDHOHNWURNLQHWLþNDVWDELOL]DFLMDWODJGHVHXYRÿHQMHLNUHWDQMHNUR]WORVWDELOL]XMXüLK
agenasa odvija pod uticajem jednosmerne struje, dok se sam mehanizam stabilizacije može
objasniti principima hemijske stabilizacije.
Slika 9. Procesi NRMLVHRGYLMDMXXVLWQR]UQRPJOLQRYLWRPWOXWRNRPHOHNWURNLQHWLþNRJtretmana

(Lamont-Black i Weltman, 2010)
Figure 9. Principal processes active in a section of clayey soil under elektrokinetic treatment
(Lamont-Black and Weltman, 2010)
O-$ý$1-(7/$*(26,17(7,&,0$
3RVHEQX QDMPODÿX JUXSX SURL]YRGD ]D VWDELOL]DFLMX tla predstavljaju geosintetici. Oni ne
GHOXMXQDWORGLUHNWQRPHQMDMXüLPXNDUDNWHULVWLNHYHüSUHX]LPDMXQDVHEHQDSUH]DQMDNRMD
u tlu nastaju ili od sopstvene težine NRQVWUXNFLMHLOLRGGHORYDQMDVSROMDãQMHJRSWHUHüHQMD (Chu
i sar., 2009). *HRVLQWHWLFLVXGDQDVãLURNR]DVWXSOMHQLXJUDÿHYLQDUVWYXNRGVDREUDüDMQLFD
KLGURWHKQLþNLKNRQVWUXNFLMDJHRWHKQLþNLKREMHNDWDPRVWRYDLGU*HRVLQWHWLþNLPDWHULMDOL
XNOMXþXMXSURSXVQHLQHSURSXVQHPDWHULMDOHNRMLSRQDþLQXL]UDGHPRJXELWLSOHWHQLWNDQLLOL
netkani. Primarne funkcije geosintetika VXVHSDUDFLMDILOWUDFLMDGUHQDåDRMDþDQMHEDULMHUD]D
WHþQRVW (gas) i kontrola erozije (Koerner, 2005).
Brojni su primeri SULPHQHUD]OLþLWLKJHRsintetiþNLKSURL]YRGDSRWSRUQL]LGRYLVSUHþDYDQMH

pojave NOL]LãWD]DãWLWDLREH]EHÿHQMHGXJRWUDMQRVWLSXWHYDLåHOHQLFDKLGURWHKQLþNLNDQDOLL
rezervoari, itd…). Geosintetici imaju veliku primenu pri izgradnji visokih nasipa. Problemi
NRMLVHSULWRPHMDYOMDMXSRWLþXRGYHOLNHVWLãOMLYRVWLLPDOHVPLþXüHþYUVWRüHWODLVSRGQDVLSD
kao i usled velikih konsolidacionih sleganja, koja se realizuju u periodu od desetak godina
(Slika 10). Upotreba geosintetika za stabilizaciju kosina nasipa je jedan od najefektivnijih
QDþLQDRMDþDQMDWOD 'DYLGRYLü.
253
3RWSRUQL ]LGRYL RG DUPLUDQRJ WOD VH JUDGH QDL]PHQLþQLP XJUDÿLYDQMHP L ]ELMDQMHP
horizontalnih slojeva tla i geosintetika (Slika 11). Geotekstil (proizvod iz grupe geosintetika)
XJUDÿHQXWORGHOXMHNDRDUPDWXUaWMGDMHWOX]DWH]QXþYUVWRüX3rednosti potpornih zidova
od armiranog tla u odnosu na druge tipove potpornih konstrukcija ogledaju se u estetici
]DKYDOMXMXüL YHOLNRP L]ERUX IDVDGQLK HOHPHQDWD SHUIRUPDQVDPD NDR IOHNVLbilne
NRQVWUXNFLMHQLVXRVHWOMLYHQDSRPHUDQMDNDRLHNRQRPLþQRVWLQDMQLåDFHQDXSRUHÿHQMXVD
drugim tipovima potpornih konstrukcija).
Geosintetici se vrlo uspešno koriste kao alternativa tradicionalnoj drenaži. Mogu da deluju
privremeno ili trajno (Bhattacharyya i sar., 2010). 8SUYRPVOXþDMXNDGDJHRVLQWHWLFLWUHED
da doprinesu stabilnosti dok tu ulogu ne preuzme vegetacija, koriste se organski materijali,
NRMLLPDMXRGUHÿHQXWUDMQRVW3ULL]JUDGQMLWXQHODLOLPRVWRYDJHRVLQWHWLFLVHXSRWUHEOMDYDMX u
sklopu hidroizolacije i njihova uloga je da pruže zaštitu oblogama tunela ili temelja (stuba)
mosta od štetnog dejstva podzemne vode, da zaštite instalacije i pruže bezbedno odvijanje
VDREUDüDMD
Slika 10. Primena geosintetika u stabilizaciji kosine

Figure 10. Application of geosynthetics in slope stabilization
Slika 11. Primena geosintetika u izgradnji potpornih konstrukcija

Figure 11. Application of geosynthetics in construction of supporting structures
254
=$./-8ý$.
U svrhu stabilizacije i poboljšanja nosivosti tla, danas je X JUDÿHYLQVNRM SUDNVL QD

UDVSRODJDQMXãLURNVSHNWDUWHKQRORJLMDLPHWRGD7UDGLFLRQDOQHPHWRGHVHYHüGXJLQL]JRGLQD
XVSHãQRSULPHQMXMXXUHãDYDQMXEURMQLKJHRWHKQLþNLKSUREOHPD6DGUXJHVWUDQHVDYUHPeni
tehnološki napredak doprineo je razvoju brojnih inovativnih metoda, koje u novije vreme sve
þHãüHQDOD]HSULPHQXXJHRWHKQLþNRMSUDNVL,DNRVXprimenom novih tehnologija postignuti
]QDþDMQL UH]XOWDWL X SRJOHGX SREROMãDQMD QRVLYRVWL WOD L QMHJRYH VWDELlizacije, ova oblast
svakako ostavlja dosta prostora u pogledu daljih pravaca istraživanja i usavršavanja koja bi
doprinela lakšem i bržem rešavanju problema u oblasti geotehnike i JUDÿHYLQarstva uopšte.
Zahvalnica
Autori rada zahvaljuju se na podršci Ministartstva prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja
5HSXEOLNH6UELMHXRNYLUXQDXþQRLVWUDåLYDþNLKSURMHNDWD TR 36028 i TR 36016.
LITERATURA:
Bell, F.G.: Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils. Engineering Geology 42 (1996) 223–237.
Bhattacharyya, R. et al.: Effectiveness of geotextiles in reducing runoff and soil loss: A synthesis.
Catena 81 (2010) 184-195.
'DYLGRYLü, N.: Složeno fundiranje, pisana predavanja. Univerzitet u Nišu, Niš. 2014.
=ODWDQRYLü(-HWJURXQGLQJ0DWHULMDOLLNRQVWUXNFLMH–90.
-HYUHPRYLü'.RVWLü6,QåHQMHUVNDJHRORJLMD*UDÿHYLQVNR-arhitektonski fakultet u Nišu. Niš
2017.
Koerner, R.: Designing with Geosynthetics. Pearson Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, NJ. 2005.
Lamont-Black, J., Weltman, A.: Elektrokinetic strengthening and repair of slopes. Ground
Engineering 1 (2010) 28–31.
Mitchell, J.K.: Soil Improvement. ISSMGE 34 (1981) 509–565.
0LFLü6Electrokinetic strengthening of a marine sediment using intermittent current. Can. Geotech.
J. 38 (2001) 287–302.
Phear, A.G., Harris, S.J.: Contributions to Geotechnique 1948–2008: Ground improvement.
Geotechnique 58 (2008) 399–404.
Stapelfeldt, T.: Preloading and vertical drains. Helsinki University of Technology, Helsinki. 2006.
Tiwari, S.K., Kumawat, N.K. Recent developments in ground improvement techniques - A review.
International Journal of Recent Development in Engineering and Technology 2 (2014) 67–
77.
Chu, J., Varaksin, S., Klotz, U., Menge, P.: Construction Processes. ISSMGE 1 (2009) 3006–3135.
Chu, J., Indraratna, B., Yan, S., Rujikiatkamjorn, C.: Overview of preloading methods for soil
improvement. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Ground Improvement, 167
(3), (2014) 173–185.
255
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.15
STRENGTHENING OF THE RAFT
FOUNDATION OF AN EXISTING RC
BUILDING BY APPLICATION OF JET-
GROUTING AS STRUCTURAL AND GROUND
IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUE
Nikolay Milev1 and Anton Sariev2
1 Department of Geotechnics, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and
Geodesy, 1 Hristo Simirnenski Blvd., Sofia 1164, Bulgaria; milev_fte@uacg.bg
2 Geoservice Engineering AD, 19 Sava Katrafilov Str., Asenovgrad 4230,
Bulgaria; a.sariev@gse.bg
ABSTRACT:
This paper presents the application of the jet-grouting method as a structural and ground
improvement technique for strengthening of the soil-raft foundation system of an existing
reinforced concrete building. The structural system of the originally designed superstructure
consists of columns for bearing the vertical loads and shear walls for ensuring the adequate
seismic response. The building has been executed up until level zero by 2010. However,
during construction, the investment intensions have been changed and the owner has decided
to extend the structure by additional floors which in turn has caused the need of redesign of
the building above the ground level and strengthening of its underground part. The aim of the
study is to demonstrate the adopted design approach for strengthening of the soil-raft
foundation system and applied methodology for proving the predicted jet-grouting properties
(diameter, length, compressive strength and elasticity modulus) as well as to outline the
difficulties which have occurred during execution and the solutions of some important
problems.
KEY WORDS: jet-grouting, single fluid system, raft foundation, soil improvement,
foundation strengthening
-$ý$1-(7(0(/-$32672-(û($%=*5$'(
PRIMENOM JET-GORUNTING KAO TEHNIKE ZA
2-$ý$1-(.216758.&,-(I 32%2/-â$1-(
ZEMLJIŠTA
REZIME:
U ovom radu prikazana je primena metoda jet goruting-D NDR WHKQLNH RMDþDQMD
NRQVWUXNFLMH L SREROMãDQMD WOD ]D MDþDQMH WHPHOMD SRVWRMHüH DUPLUDQR-betonske
zgrade. Konstrukcijski sistem prvobitno dizajnirane nadgradnje sastoji se od
stubova za nošenje vertikDOQLKRSWHUHüHQMDLERþQLKzidova NDNR EL VH RVLJXUDR
DGHNYDWDQ VHL]PLþNL RG]LY =JUDGD MH L]YHGHQD GR QLYRD QXOD GR
JRGLQH 0HÿXWLPWRNRPgradnje, namere investitora su promenjene i vlasnik je
256
RGOXþLR GD SURãLUL konstrukciju dodatnim spratovima što je zauzvrat izazvalo

potrebu redizajna zgrade L L]QDGL LVSRG]HPOMH &LOM VWXGLMH MH SRND]DWL XVYRMHQL
GL]DMQHUVNL SULVWXS]DMDþDQMH WHPHOMD L SULPHQMHQX PHWRGRORJLMX GRND]LYDQMD
SUHGYLÿHQLKV YRMVWDYDMHW-grounting- D SUHþQLN GXåLQD þYUVWRüDQD SULWLVDN L
PRGXO HODVWLþQRVWL NDR L GD VH QDYHGX SRWHãNRüH GR NRMLK MH GRãOR WRNRP
L]YUãHQMDLUHãHQMDQHNLKYDåQLKSUREOHPD
./M8ý1(5(ý,MHWJURXWLQJVLVWHPVDMHGQRPWHþQRãüXWHPHOMSREROMãDQMHWOD
MDþDQMHWHPHOMD
INTRODUCTION
A case study of soil-foundation system strengthening is presented in the paper. The studied
building’s RC structure (columns and slabs for vertical loads and walls for seismic loads) has
been designed in 2007 and has been planned to be realized in the seaside city of Burgas in
Bulgaria. According to the original project the building consists of 14 levels as well as 5
underground levels. The execution process has started in 2008 and has been interrupted in
2010 as only the basement part of the building has been constructed then. Due to investment
intensions change it has been decided to construct the remaining superstructure and to extend
it by 4 additional levels as well as to switch building’s function from office to residential. In
order to do so a strengthening project has been prepared. The project includes a number of
measures regarding the superstructure (reparation, RC-jacketing, execution of new structural
elements among others) as addition to the soil-foundation improvement.
Fig. 1 Existing condition and spatial view of the structure
The foundation of the existing part of the building consists of a raft. In order to reduce the
settlements due to the additional loads from the extension and for the sake of increasing the
stiffness of the modulus of subgrade reaction in the numerical model it has been decided to
execute jet-grouting as a hybrid soil improvement-structural strengthening measure. The
operating conditions (height of 2.80 m in the basement) have made this solution as an only
option.
257
Jet-grouting soil improvement technique (described in [3]) has gained popularity during the
last few decades. Its application range is wide and some typical examples include
foundations, retaining structures, water barriers, tunnels among others. The jet-grouting
process is recognized as a cement soil stabilization. With the aid of high pressure (400 bar)
cutting jets of water or cement suspension having a nozzle exit YHORFLW\ PVHF
eventually air-shrouded the soil around the borehole is eroded. The eroded soil is rearranged
and mixed with the cement suspension. The soilcement mix is partly flushed out to the top
of the borehole through the annular space between the jet grouting rods and the borehole.
Single fluid version of the jet-grouting technique has been adopted for the particular project.
In the single fluid system, the water-cement grout is injected into the ground through one or
more nozzles. In this case, soil remoulding and subsequent cementation are both caused by
the same fluid.
The adopted configuration of the 206 jet-grouting columns having a diameter of 80 cm is

given on Figure 2. The execution process consists of seven major steps as follows: 1) drilling
of the existing raft; 2) forming of the jet-grouting columns (length of 7 m and 5 m) through
high-pressure injection of water-cement grout; 3) insertion of a steel pipes ()114.3x8, length
of 5 m and 2.5 m) for load transferring from the raft to jet-grouting column and for the sake
of increasing its compressive bearing capacity; 4) grouting of the space between the raft and
the pipe; 5) insertion of reinforcement in the pipe – the upper part of the reinforcement sticks
out of the raft so that it could be linked to the reinforcement of the foundation top jacketing;
6) grouting of the inner volume of the pipe and execution of a 15 centimeter RC strengthening
(top jacketing) of the existing raft.
Fig. 2 Soil-foundation system strengthening approach

258
SOIL CONDITIONS AND VERIFICATION OF JET-GROUTING COLUMN

PROPERTIES
The soil conditions on site are shown on Table 1. The foundation raft is located at level +9.05
meaning that it layes on saturated Layer 3 (Pliocene clays).
Table 1 Soil properties

Layer number
Characteristic values of soil parameters

height [m]
Level [m]
depth [m]
Soil layer
Soil layer
Layer description
Strength and Constitutive model
Physical properties N SPT
deformability properties parameters (HS Model)
26.60 0.00 E oed ,100 = 4.75 MPa Ȗ n,k = 19.30 kN/m
3 ref
E 50 = 11.88 MPa
E oed ,200 = 5.55 MPa Ȗ r,k = 19.60 kN/m
3 ref
E oed = 4.75 MPa
E oed ,300 = 9.10 MPa Ȗ s,k = 27.00 kN/m
3 ref
E ur = 47.50 MPa
Dark brown to light
E d ,100 = 9.50 MPa Ȗ d,k = 15.20 kN/m
3 p ref = 0.10 MPa
0.80 brown clay, 20
1 E d ,200 = 11.10 MPa Ȗ' k = 9.30 kN/m
3 Ȟur = 0.20
Quaternary - Q
E d ,300 = 18.20 MPa ‫= ؂‬ 0.00 o
ĳ' k = 5 o
m= 1.00
c' k = 85 kPa K NC 0 = 0.58
25.80 0.80 E oed ,100 = 3.20 MPa Ȗ n,k = 19.40 kN/m
3 ref
E 50 = 8.00 MPa
Light brown and E oed ,200 = 5.15 MPa Ȗ r,k = 19.92 kN/m
3 ref
E oed = 3.20 MPa
yellow brown clay, E oed ,300 = 11.50 MPa Ȗ s,k = 27.50 kN/m
3 ref
E ur = 32.00 MPa
sandy-silt with E d ,100 = 6.40 MPa Ȗ d,k = 15.60 kN/m
3 p ref = 0.10 MPa
10.00 27
2 calcareous inclusions E d ,200 = 10.30 MPa Ȗ' k = 9.40 kN/m
3 Ȟur = 0.20
and gravel - E d ,300 = 23.00 MPa ‫= ؂‬ 0.00 o
Quaternary - Q ĳ' k = 23 o
m= 1.00
c' k = 55 kPa K NC 0 = 0.58
15.80 10.80 E oed ,100 = 2.94 MPa Ȗ n,k = 18.00 kN/m3 E ref 50 = 5.88 MPa
E oed ,200 = 4.39 MPa Ȗ r,k = 18.19 kN/m3 E ref oed = 2.94 MPa
E oed ,300 = 9.89 MPa Ȗ s,k = 27.50 kN/m3 E ref ur = 29.40 MPa
E d ,100 = 5.88 MPa Ȗ d,k = 12.90 kN/m
3 p ref = 0.10 MPa
15.00 Pliocene clays – N 2 35
3 E d ,200 = 8.78 MPa Ȗ' k = 8.00 kN/m
3 Ȟur = 0.20
E d ,300 = 19.78 MPa ‫= ؂‬ 0.00 o
ĳ' k = 17 o
m= 0.70
c' k = 69.3 kPa K NC 0 = 0.71
Usually in practice, it is necessary to correlate the jet grouting effects (i.e., column diameter
and properties) to the original soil properties (i.e., grain size, shear strength) and to the
treatment procedures (i.e., treatment parameters). However, because all soils are inherently
heterogeneous, the mechanical and geometrical characteristics of the columns are usually
variable.
In the presented project a simple approach for verification of the jet-grouting columns'
diameter has been adopted. Three test columns (TC-A1, TC-A2 and TC-A3) have been
executed by three different treatment procedures. Thereafter, boreholes have been drilled in
the center and perifery (at distance 40 cm from the center) of all three columns. In otder to
prove that a diameter of at least 80 cm is ensured, a continous sample is taken through the
whole length of the borehole. The judgment is made on the basis whether treated medium is
observed through the whole sample or not. In the particular case study test columns TC-A1
and TC-A2 showed unsatisfactory results. In contrast, test column TC-A3 demonstrated a
treated zone with the desired dimensions (Fig 3.).
259
Fig. 3 Ensuring of mechanical properties and column dimensions by means of test columns
Probes have been extracted from the only test column with satisfactory dimensions – in this
case TC-A3. The mechanical properties (unconfined compressive strength, ultimate axial
strain and deformation modulus) of the jet-grouting columns have been evaluated in the
laboratory. Due to soil’s heterogeneity results show values of wide range as it could be seen
on Table 2. The compressive strength varies from 3.25 MPa to 8.10 MPa. A characteristic
value of 4.50 MPa has been adopted as input value for the design.
Table 2 Test jet-grouting column TC-A3 properties obtained in the laboratory

Unconfined
Ultimate Deformation
Test column compressive
ʋ Depth axial strain modulus
TC-A3 strength
İ u,z Eo
qu
- - [m] [kPa] [%] [MPa]
1 0.80 - 1.00 m 3272.2 ± 163.6 0.37 ± 0.04 885
2 0.84 - 1.00 m 4992.2 ± 249.6 0.95 ± 0.09 525
3 2.76 - 2.90 m 4576.9 ± 228.8 0.37 ± 0.04 508
4 4.80 - 4.94 m 8092.5 ± 404.6 0.47 ± 0.05 1722
5 6.00 - 6.23 m 7332.4 ± 366.6 0.49 ± 0.05 1496
6 6.23 - 6.40 m 4664.6 ± 233.2 0.96 ± 0.10 486
7 6.40 - 6.53 m 6038.4 ± 301.9 0.48 ± 0.05 1258
8 6.53 - 6.71 m 6099.6 ± 305.0 0.62 ± 0.06 984
9 2.60 - 2.88 m 4985.3 ± 249.3 0.76 ± 0.08 656
10 4.50 - 4.63 m 6258.5 ± 312.9 0.94 ± 0.09 665
11 5.20 - 5.36 m 5837.3 ± 293.7 0.73 ± 0.07 800
12 5.60 - 5.76 m 6873.7 ± 343.7 0.86 ± 0.09 799
13 5.86 - 6.00 m 5790.4 ± 289.5 0.77 ± 0.08 752
260
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
The „bed of springs“ model has been adopted as an approach for consideration of the soil-
structure interaction effect in numerical analysis. Soil (as physically and mechanically
described medium in Table 1) has been modelled as a continuum and represented by the
Mohr-Coulomb constitutive model in SAP2000 software for the sake of evaluating the
modulus of subgrade reaction. Stress which has been obtained through the analysis has been
divided by the calculated settlement for the sake of determining the springs’ stiffness (Fig.
4).
Fig. 4 Evaluation of modulus of vertical subgrade reaction through a numerical solution
The modulus of subgrade reaction of the jet-grouting treated area has been evaluated on the
basis of a load-settlement relation which has been obtained through analytical procedures as
well as a pile-test numerical FEM simulation as seen in [4] in the software PLAXIS 2D by
using the Hardening-Soil (HS) constitutive model (explained in details in [5]) – Figure 5.
An overview of the adopted values for the modulus of subgrade reaction is given in Figure
6.
Furthermore, a 3D finite-element model which represents the superstructure in details has
been developed in ETABS software. Elements from the program library have been adopted
for the sake of representing the structural elements as follows: frame elements for beams and
columns, shell elements for walls, slabs and raft foundation. The soil has been modelled by
area-spring elements. A comparison of the bending moments in the raft is made between a
model with evenly distributed (same stiffness) springs (existing raft) and a model which
considers the soil improvement (jet-grouting) by introducing zones with stiffer springs –
Figure 7.
261
Fig. 5 Numerical FEM simulation of jet-grouting test in PLAXIS 2D
Fig. 6 Comparison of modulus of vertical subgrade reaction of the existing raft and the JG strengthened raft
Fig. 7 3D FEM model of the existing structure and bending moment in the raft (existing raft vs. JG strengthened
raft)
262
The jet-grouting columns themselves have been designed in a similar matter to piles.
Naturally the treated zone has a remarkable bond with the surrounding soil due to the soil-
mixing technique and consequently the geotechnical resistance (jet to soil failure) is typically
higher than the structural one (compressive strength of the column). Skin friction and end-
bearing have been evaluated on the basis of the available SPT results (Table 1) according to
the correlations available in [1] and [2]. Design geotechnical resistance (bearing capacity) of
the 7-meter columns has been evaluated as 1225 kN (sum of skin friction of 1225 kN and
end-bearing of 35 kN) and the one of the 5-meter columns – 875 kN (sum of skin friction of
840 kN and end-bearing of 35 kN). Structural strength (bearing capacity) is calculated on the
basis of unconfined compressive strength and columns’ diameter and has been set to 520 kN.
The relevant bearing capacity of 520 kN has been compared with the maximum design force
of 1200 kN. The bearing capacity shortage has been compensated by installing of a steel pipe
in the jet-grouting columns. The compressive bearing capacity of the composite element has
been evaluated as 1217 kN.
PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS
During the execution of the jet-grouting columns a defect has been detected in about 90 of
them. Although the injection procedure has been performed all the way to the top of the raft,
settlement of the columns of about 70 cm below the bottom edge of the foundation has been
observed the reason for which remains unknown. In order to solve the problem the following
technology has been applied: 1) the affected zone between the raft and the jet has been flushed
by water under pressure through a tube in order to liquefy the grout reflux in it; 2) expandable
grout MAPEI Expanjet (up to 20% volume expansion and compressive strength of 10 MPa)
has been injected at 5 bar pressure. In order to ensure a closed system all neighboring
openings (except for one for reflux excess) have been sealed with a packer. The adopted
approach is presented on Figure 8.
Fig. 8 Filling the void between the jet-grouting columns and the existing raft at two stages
263
CONCLUSIONS
The adopted hybrid soil improvement-structural retrofitting approach by applying the jet-
grouting technique has ensured an adequate performance of the structure during and after its
extension. The strengthening measure has stiffened the soil-foundation zone below the high-
rise part of the building which has influenced the redistribution of the bending moments in a
favorable way as well as it has reduced the expected settlement significantly. Although some
defects have been detected the reparation measures have guaranteed the undisturbed
exploitation of the structure.
264
REFERENCES
[1] Bustamante, M. 2002. Les colonnes de jet grouting. Report of the Seminar: Pathologies des Sols
et des Foundations, http://www.keller-france.com/rechercheet-developpement/theses-et-
publications: 6 p [in French]..
[2] Croce, P., Flora, A., Modoni, G. 2014. Jet Grouting: Technology, Design and Control. Taylor &
Francis Group
[3] EN 12716. 2001. Execution of Special Geotechnical Works: Jet Grouting. European Committee
for Standardization
[4] Kerenchev, N. I. Markov, 2016. Determining the axial bearing capacity of pile based on common
methods and comparison with pile load test, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference
VIETGEO2016
[5] PLAXIS Version 2012.02, 2012. Scientific Manual, Delft University of Technology & PLAXIS,
The Netherlands, A. A. Balkema, PUBLISHERS.
265
Prethodno saopštenje
UDK 627.824.7.012.4(65)
ɉɊɈȻɇɈɂɇȳȿɄɐɂɈɇɈɉɈȴȿȻɊɇȺ
ȻɊȺɇɂɋȿɄɅȺɎȺȼɂɅȺȳȺɅȺȽɍȺɌȺɅɀɂɊ
ɉɟʁɨɜɢʄɋɜɟɬɨɡɚɪ
ɋɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɧɢɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬCIP ɇɟɦɚʃɢɧɚIV, Beograd,

svetozar.pejovic@sicip.co.rs
ɊȿɁɂɆȿ
ȺɉȾ-ɨɦɤɨʁɢʁɟɭɪɚɞɢɥɚCOBA, Ʌɢɫɚɛɨɧɉɨɪɬɭɝɚɥɢʁɚ ɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɨʁɟɞɚȻɪɚɧɚɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ
ɭ ȼɢɥɚɢ Ʌɚɝɭɚɬ ɨɛɪɚɡɭʁɟ ɚɤɭɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɭ ɫɚ ɡɚɩɪɟɦɢɧɨɦ ɯɦ3 ɲɬɨ ɛɢ ɨɦɨɝɭʄɢɥɨ
ɪɟɝɭɥɚɰɢʁɭ ɞɨɬɨɤɚ ɪɟɤɟ ɂɦɚʁɭʄɢ ɭ ɜɢɞɭ ɝɟɨɝɪɚɮɫɤɢ ɩɨɥɨɠɚʁ ɚɤɭɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɤɨʁɚ ɛɢ ɫɟ
ɮɨɪɦɢɪɚɥɚɭɞɟɥɭ ɋɚɯɚɪɫɤɨɝȺɬɥɚɫɚʁɚɫɧɨʁɟɞɚʁɟɬɚɤɨɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɪɟɝɭɥɢɫɚɧɢɩɪɨɬɨɤ
ɜɪɥɨ ɡɧɚɱɚʁɚɧ ɚ ɭɩɨɬɪɟɛʂɚɜɚʄɟ ɫɟ ɡɚ ɧɚɜɨɞʃɚɜɚʃɟ ɞɨɥɢɧɟ ɧɢɡɜɨɞɧɨɨɞ ɚɤɭɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɟ
ɤɚɨɢɡɚɫɧɚɛɞɟɜɚʃɟɩɢʁɚʄɨɦɜɨɞɨɦɫɭɫɟɞɧɢɯɧɚɫɟʂɚ ɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɦʁɟɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɨɞɚɫɟɧɚ
ɪɟɰɢ Ɇ
Ɂɢ ɤɚɨ ɝɥɚɜɧɢ ɨɛʁɟɤɚɬ ɩɨɞɢɝɧɟ ɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɚ ɝɪɚɜɢɬɚɰɢɨɧɚ ɛɪɚɧɚ ɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ
ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɟ ɜɢɫɢɧɟ ɦ ɍ ɨɤɜɢɪɭ ɛɪɚɧɟ ɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ ɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɚ ɫɭ ɞɜɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɚ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɚ ɩɨʂɚ ʁɟɞɧɨ ɧɚ ɥɟɜɨʁ ɢ ʁɟɞɧɨ ɧɚ ɞɟɫɧɨʁ ɨɛɚɥɢ ɪɟɤɟ Ɉɜɞɟ ʄɟ ɛɢɬɢ ɪɟɱɢ ɨ
ɩɪɨɛɧɨɦɩɨʂɭɛɪ1 ɧɚɥɟɜɨʁɨɛɚɥɢɍɤɭɩɧɚɞɭɠɢɧɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝɩɨʂɚɢɡɧɨɫɢ
ɦ Ɋɚɞɨɜɢ ɧɚ ɛɭɲɟʃɭ ɢ ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɭ ɧɚ ɨɜɨʁ ɩɪɨɛɧɨʁ ɞɟɨɧɢɰɢ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɢ ɫɭ ɨɞ
ɞɨɝɨɞɢɧɟɉɪɜɨɫɭɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɪɟɩɟɪɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ)3-ɢ)3-13.
Ɉɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɟɢɡɦɟɻɭɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚʁɟɦɚɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɫɭɤɚɨɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟ
ɫɚʁɟɡɝɪɨɜɚʃɟɦɢɭʃɢɦɚʁɟɢɡɜɪɲɟɧɨɩɢɬɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬɢɫɬɟɧɫɤɟɦɚɫɟɦɟɬɨɞɨɦ
Ʌɢɠɨɧɚɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɚɧɚɥɢɡɟɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɨɩɢɬɚɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢɭɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɦɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚ
ɦɨɠɟɫɟɝɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɨɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢɞɚʁɟɫɬɟɧɫɤɚɦɚɫɚɞɨɛɪɨɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚɂɡɦɟɻɭɪɟɩɟɪɧɟ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ )3- ɢ ɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɟ )3- ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟ ɫɭ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ ɧɚ ɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɨɦ
ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭɨɞɦɞɨɤɫɟɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟɤɨʁɟɫɭɢɡɦɟɻɭɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɟ)3-ɢɪɟɩɟɪɧɟ
FP-ɧɚɥɚɡɟɧɚɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭɨɞɦɇɚɜɟʄɢɧɢɟɬɚɠɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɢɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ
ɧɢɫɭ ɪɟɝɢɫɬɪɨɜɚɧɢ ɜɟɥɢɤɢ ɭɬɪɨɲɰɢ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ ɨɞ - ɤɝɦ¶ ɫɭɜɟ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɞɨɤ ɫɟ ɧɚ ɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɢɦ ɟɬɚɠɚɦɚ ɩɨɫɟɛɧɨ ɭ ɩɪɜɨʁ ɪɟɩɟɪɧɨʁ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɢ
ɭɬɪɨɲɚɤ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɤɪɟʄɟ ɢ ɩɪɟɤɨ ɤɝɦ¶ ɫɭɜɟ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɇɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ
ɚɧɚɥɢɡɟɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚɧɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɦɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦɩɨʂɭɩɪɨɢɡɢɥɚɡɢɡɚɤʂɭɱɚɤ
ɞɚʁɟɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɨɡɚɞɪɠɚɬɢɨɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɟɢɡɦɟɻɭɢʃɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɡɚɜɟɫɟɨɞ
ɦ
ɄȴɍɑɇȿɊȿɑɂ ɛɪɚɧɚɜɨɞɚɢɧɜɟɫɬɢɰɢʁɚɠɢɜɨɬ
TEST INJECTION FIELD NO. 1 ON DAM SEKLAF,

VILLAGE LAGUAT, ALGERIA
ABSTRACT
The APD, done by COBA, Lisbon Portugal, provides that the Seklaf Dam at Vilai Laghouat
will form a reservoir with a useful storage capacity of 30.0 hm3, which would allow regulation
of river flow. Given the geographical location of the reservoir that would form on the Sahara
266
Atlas, it is clear that the regulated flow thus obtained is very significant, and will be used to
irrigate the valley downstream of the reservoir and to supply drinking water to neighboring
settlements.The project envisages the erection of a concrete gravity dam of Seklaf, with a
maximum height of 52 m, as the main object on the M'Zi River. Two test injection fields, one
on the left and one on the right bank of the river, are foreseen within the Seklaf Dam. This
will be about trial field # 1 on the left bank. The total length of test injection field 1 is 20 m.
Drilling and injection works on this test section have been conducted since 06.12.2013. to
10.01.2014. years. First, 2 benchmark wells were constructed: FP-1 and FP-13. The axial
distance between the reference wells is 20.0 m. and they were performed as core explorations
and were subjected to a water permeability test of rock mass by the Lijon method. Based on
the analysis of the water permeability test results in the reference wells, it can be generally
concluded that the rock mass is well water permeable. Injection wells were performed at a
distance of 2.0 m between the FP-1 reference well and the primary FP-5, while the injection
wells between the primary FP-5 and the FP-13 reference well were 3.0 m apart. On most
floors of injection and bench wells, no large injection masses were registered, usually from
5-30 kg / m 'of dry injection mass, while on some floors, especially in the first bench, the
injection mass exceeds 300 kg / m' of dry injection mass. Based on the analysis of injection
results in the test injection field 1, it is concluded that the axial distance between the injection
wells of the curtain of 3.0 m should be maintained.
KEY WORDS: dam, water, investments, life
ɍȼɈȾ
Ɂɚ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɟ ɢɡɪɚɞɟ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɚ ɛɪɚɧɟ ɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɫɭ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚ ɝɨɞɢɧɟ
ɂɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚ ɫɭ ɫɟ ɫɜɟɥɚ ɧɚ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɨ ɛɭɲɟʃɟ ɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɝ ɦɟɫɬɚ ɛɪɚɧɟ ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɨ
ɤɚɪɬɢɪɚʃɟ ɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɝ ɦɟɫɬɚ ɝɟɨɮɢɡɢɱɤɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɍ ɜɪɟɦɟɧɭ ɨɞ ɞɨ
ɝɨɞɢɧɟ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɫɭ ɞɨɞɚɬɧɚ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɚ ɛɭɲɟʃɚ ɭ ɡɨɧɢ ɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɝ ɦɟɫɬɚ ɛɪɚɧɟ ɡɚ
ɩɨɬɪɟɛɟ ɢɡɝɪɚɞʃɟ ɫɥɚɩɢɲɬɚ ɢ ɞɢɫɢɩɚɰɢɨɧɨɝ ɛɚɡɟɧɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ ɡɚ
ɩɨɬɪɟɛɟɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚɩɪɨɛɧɢɯɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɩɨʂɚɢ
Ɍɨɤɨɦɧɨɜɟɦɛɪɚɢɞɟɰɟɦɛɪɚɢʁɚɧɭɚɪɚɝɨɞɢɧɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨʁɟɩɪɨɛɧɨɩɨʂɟɧɚ
ɥɟɜɨʁɨɛɚɥɢɛɪɚɧɟɋɟɤɥɚɮɚȻɭɲɨɬɢɧɟɤɨʁɟɫɭɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɧɚɨɜɨɦɩɪɨɛɧɨɦɩɨʂɭɧɚɥɚɡɟ
ɫɟɧɚɬɪɚɫɢɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɡɚɜɟɫɟɭɨɤɜɢɪɭɬɟɥɚɛɪɚɧɟɢɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɫɭɫɚɨɫɧɨɜɧɟɫɬɟɧɟ
ɐɢʂɨɜɨɝɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝɩɨʂɚʁɟɭɬɜɪɻɢɜɚʃɟɪɚɫɩɨɪɟɞɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ
ɛɪɨʁɚ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɛɪɨʁ ɩɪɜɢɯ ɞɪɭɝɢɯ ɬɪɟʄɢɯ ɢɬɞ ɞɭɛɢɧɭ ɛɭɲɟʃɚ
ɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɭ ɟɬɚɠɟ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɟ ɭ ɟɬɚɠɚɦɚ ɫɚɫɬɚɜ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɢ ɞɪ ɉɪɢɦɚɪɧɟ ɢ
ɤɨɧɬɪɨɥɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɪɚɻɟɧɟɫɚʁɟɡɝɪɨɜɚʃɟɦɞɨɤɫɭɨɫɬɚɥɟɪɚɻɟɧɟɭɞɚɪɧɨɦɦɟɬɨɞɨɦ
ɍɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚɫɭɪɚɻɟɧɢɨɩɢɬɢȼȾɉɦɟɬɨɞɨɦɅɢɠɨɧɫɚɟɬɚɠɨɦɨɞɦɟɬɚɪɚ
267
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɪɨɛɧɨɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɩɨʂɟɛɪ
Figure 1. Test area for injection No. 1.
ȽȿɈɅɈɒɄȺȽɊȺȭȺɉɊȿȽɊȺȾɇɈȽɆȿɋɌȺȻɊȺɇȿɋȿɄɅȺɎȺ
ɇɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɤɚɪɬɢɪɚʃɚ ɢɫɤɨɩɚ ɬɟɦɟʂɚ ɛɪɚɧɟ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɧɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɤɚɪɬɢɪɚʃɚ ɲɢɪɟ ɡɨɧɟ
ɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɝɦɟɫɬɚɦɨɠɟɫɟɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢɞɚɬɟɪɟɧɢɡɝɪɚɻɭʁɭ
ɒʂɭɧɤɨɜɢɬɨ– ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɢɪɟɱɧɢɚɥɭɜɢɨɧDO
Ʉɨɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɢɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥ ɧɚɩɚɞɢɧɚɦɚɤɨʁɢɫɟɫɚɫɬɨʁɢɨɞɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɩɟɥɢɬɚɢɨɛɥɭɬɚɤɚ
ɤɨʁɢɫɭɡɚɝɥɢʃɟɧɢɠɭɬɨ– ɡɟɥɟɧɟɞɨɫɢɜɤɚɫɬɟɛɨʁɟ.
ɉɟɲɱɚɪɫɤɨ– ɩɟɥɢɬɫɤɢɫɥɨʁɟɜɢ:
ɋɢɜɢɞɨɡɟɥɟɧɤɚɫɬɨ– ɫɢɜɢɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɫɚɭɦɟɬɧɭɬɢɦɡɟɥɟɧɤɚɫɬɨ– ɫɢɜɢɦɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚ
J 5b
ɩɟɥɢɬɚ 1c )
ɉɟɥɢɬ ɰɪɜɟɧɤɚɫɬ ɫɚ ɦɟɫɬɢɦɢɱɧɢɦ ɩɪɨɫɥɨʁɰɢɦɚ ɫɢɜɢɯ ɞɨ ɫɢɜɨ–ɡɟɥɟɧɤɚɫɬɢɯ
ɩɟɲɱɚɪɚ
J15bb )
ɉɟɲɱɚɪɢɢɩɟɥɢɬɢɫɢɜɢɞɨɫɢɜɨ– ɡɟɥɟɧɤɚɫɬɢ 1a ).
J 5b
ɉɟɲɱɚɪɫɢɬɧɨɡɪɧɫɢɥɢɮɢɤɨɜɚɧɬɜɪɞ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɢɦɚɥɨɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟ-2
ɦɨɞɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɚɞɭɠɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɢɞɭɛʂɟɋɬɟɧɚʁɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɚɫɚɩɪɨɦɟɧʂɢɜɨɦ
ɞɟɛʂɢɧɨɦɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɨɞɦɞɨɦȼɢɞʂɢɜɢɫɭɩɪɨɫɥɨʁɰɢɡɟɥɟɧɢɯɩɟɥɢɬɚɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ
ɫɢɜɢɯɞɨɬɚɦɧɨɫɢɜɢɯɭɤɨɪɢɬɭɪɟɤɟɧɟɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɢɯɬɚɧɤɨɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɢɯɞɟɛʂɢɧɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ
268
ɞɨ ɰɦ ɉɟɲɱɚɪɢ ɫɭ ɞɟɥɢɦɢɱɧɨ ɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɢ ɞɭɠ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ɝɞɟ ʁɟ ɛɨʁɚ ɰɪɜɟɧɤɚɫɬɚ
ɭɫɥɟɞɰɢɪɤɭɥɚɰɢʁɟɜɨɞɟɉɚɞɫɥɨʁɟɜɚʁɟɢɡɦɟɻɭɚɡɢɦɭɬɚÛɢÛɢɩɚɞɧɨɝɭɝɥɚɨɞ
Û-Ûɉɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɧɚɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭɨɞɰɦɞɨɦɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦɛɟɡɢɫɩɭɧɟɢɥɢɫɚɦɚɥɨ
ɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɟɢɫɩɭɧɟɢɬɨɭɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɨɦɞɟɥɭȾɭɠɢɧɚɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚʁɟɜɢɲɟɦɟɬɚɪɚɢɭɨɜɨʁ
ɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ ʁɟ ɦɨɝɭʄɟ ɩɪɚɬɢɬɢ ɩɪɭɠɚʃɟ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ɉɟɲɱɚɪɢ ɫɭ ɞɨɛɪɢɯ ɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-
ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɚ RQD ɭ ɨɜɨʁ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ ʁɟ ɢɡɧɚɞ Ɉɜɚ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɚ ʁɟ
ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɫɤɢ ɩɨɪɨɡɧɚ ȼɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬ ʁɟ ɜɟʄɚ ɭ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɢɦ ɞɟɥɨɜɢɦɚ ɢ ɨɧɚ ɫɟ
ɫɦɚʃɭʁɟɫɚɞɭɛɢɧɨɦɁɚɨɜɭɫɪɟɞɢɧɭɫɟɦɨɠɟɪɟʄɢɞɚʁɟɞɨɛɪɨɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚ
Ɂɟɥɟɧɢɩɟɥɢɬɥɢɫɬɚɫɬɞɨɬɚɧɤɨɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɧɚɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢɬɟɪɟɧɚɩɨɬɩɭɧɨɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɞɨ
ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ ɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɟ ɤɨɦɩɨɧɟɧɬɟ ɉɨʁɚɜʂɭʁɟ ɫɟ ɢ ɤɚɨ ɩɪɨɫɥɨʁɚɤ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ
ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɚɞɟɛʂɢɧɚɦɭʁɟɞɨɰɦɍɤɨɥɢɤɨɧɢʁɟɭɞɨɞɢɪɭɫɚɜɚɡɞɭɯɨɦɢɚɤɨ
ɧɢʁɟɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɛɨʁɚɦɭʁɟɫɜɟɬɥɨɡɟɥɟɧɚɚɭɤɨɥɢɤɨʁɟɭɞɨɞɢɪɭɫɚɜɚɡɞɭɯɨɦɢɜɨɞɨɦɛɨʁɚ
ʁɟ ɡɟɥɟɧɚ ɋɬɟɧɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɞɥɨɠɧɚ ɛɪɡɨʁ ɚɥɬɟɪɚɰɢʁɢ ɋɥɚɛɢɯ ɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɯ
ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɚRQD ɭɨɜɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢʁɟɦɚʃɢɨɞɂɫɩɭɰɚɥɚɫɪɟɞɢɧɚɫɚɤɪɚɬɤɢɦ
ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɦɚɞɭɠɢɧɟɞɨɦɤɨʁɟɫɭɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟɫɚɦɚɥɨɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɟɢɫɩɭɧɟɈɜɚɫɪɟɞɢɧɚʁɟ
ɬɚɤɨɻɟɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɫɤɢɩɨɪɨɡɧɚɫɪɟɞʃɟɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚɉɚɞɫɥɨʁɟɜɚʁɟɢɡɦɟɻɭɚɡɢɦɭɬɚÛ
ɢÛɢɩɚɞɧɨɝɭɝɥɚɨɞÛ-Û
ɍɤɨɪɢɬɭɪɟɤɟɞɟɨɤɨʁɢʁɟɢɫɤɨɩɚɧɨɜɚɫɬɟɧɫɤɚɦɚɫɚʁɟɫɢɜɟɞɨɬɚɦɧɨɫɢɜɟɛɨʁɟɥɢɫɬɚɫɬɚ
ɞɨɬɚɧɤɨɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɚɫɚɞɟɛʂɢɧɨɦɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ-ɰɦɬɜɪɞɚɬɚɧɤɨɭɫɥɨʁɟɧɚɚɭɞɨɞɢɪɭɫɚ
ɜɚɡɞɭɯɨɦɢɜɨɞɨɦɧɚɤɨɧɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɨɝɪɟɥɚɬɢɜɧɨɤɪɚɬɤɨɝɜɪɟɦɟɧɚ-ɞɚɧɚɩɪɟɬɜɚɪɚɫɟ
ɭɢɜɟɪɚɫɬɭɪɚɫɩɚɞɢɧɭɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟɰɦɍɨɜɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢɫɭɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧɢɩɪɨɫɥɨʁɰɢɩɟɲɱɚɪɚ
ɞɟɛʂɢɧɟ ɞɨ ɰɦ ɉɭɤɨɬɢɧɟ ɫɭ ɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦ ɤɪɚɬɤɟ ɞɨ ɦ ɪɟɬɤɨ ɞɭɠɟ ɇɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ ɫɭ
ɫɬɢɫɧɭɬɟɢɥɢɫɚɦɚɥɨɢɫɩɭɧɟɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɢɦɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɨɦRQD ɭɨɜɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ
ʁɟɜɟʄɚɨɞɉɨɪɨɡɧɨɫɬʁɟɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɫɤɚɋɚɞɭɛɢɧɨɦɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɫɟɫɦɚʃɭʁɟɁɚ
ɨɜɭɫɪɟɞɢɧɭɫɟɦɨɠɟɪɟʄɢɞɚʁɟɫɥɚɛɨɞɨɫɪɟɞʃɟɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚ
ɐɪɜɟɧɢɩɟɥɢɬɥɢɫɬɚɫɬɞɨɬɚɧɤɨɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɫɚɞɟɛʂɢɧɨɦɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ-ɰɦɇɚɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢ
ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɨɜɚ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɚ ɦɚɫɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɬɩɭɧɨ ɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧ ɞɨ ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ ɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɟ
ɤɨɦɩɨɧɟɧɬɟ ɚ ɫɚ ɞɭɛɢɧɨɦ ɫɟ ɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɨɫɬ ɫɦɚʃɭʁɟ ɍ ɞɨɞɢɪɭ ɫɚ ɜɨɞɨɦ ɢ ɜɚɡɞɭɯɨɦ
ɞɨɥɚɡɢɞɨɛɪɡɟɚɥɬɟɪɚɰɢʁɟȻɨʁɚɡɚɜɢɫɢɨɞɫɬɟɩɟɧɚɚɥɬɟɪɚɰɢʁɟɢɨɧɚʁɟɫɜɟɬɥɨɰɪɜɟɧɚɞɨ
ɬɚɦɧɨɰɪɜɟɧɚɋɬɟɧɚʁɟɫɥɚɛɢɯɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɯɫɜɨʁɫɬɚɜɚɋɪɟɞɢɧɚʁɟɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɫɤɢ
ɢɡɞɟʂɟɧɚɚɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɤɪɚɬɤɟɞɨɦɇɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ ɫɭɫɚɦɚɥɨɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɟɢɫɩɭɧɟɱɢʁɚʁɟ
ɛɨʁɚɤɚɨɢɛɨʁɚɫɬɟɧɟɰɪɜɟɧɚɞɨɬɚɦɧɨɰɪɜɟɧɚRQD ɭɨɜɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢɫɟɤɪɟʄɟɨɞ-60%.
ɉɨɪɨɡɧɨɫɬ ʁɟ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɫɤɚ Ʉɚɨ ɢ ɤɨɞ ɩɪɟɬɯɨɞɧɢɯ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɚ ɬɚɤɨ ɫɟ ɢ ɤɨɞ ɨɜɟ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɟ
ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɫɚ ɞɭɛɢɧɨɦɫɦɚʃɭʁɟɩɚɫɟɡɚɨɜɭɫɪɟɞɢɧɭɦɨɠɟɪɟʄɢɞɚʁɟɫɥɚɛɨɞɨ
ɫɪɟɞʃɟɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚɉɚɞɫɥɨʁɟɜɚʁɟɢɡɦɟɻɭɚɡɢɦɭɬɚÛɢÛɢɩɚɞɧɨɝɭɝɥɚɨɞÛ-
Û
ɉɭɤɨɬɢɧɟ
Ɂɚɤɨɦɩɥɟɬɧɭɫɬɟɧɫɤɭɦɚɫɭɤɨʁɚɢɡɝɪɚɻɭʁɟɛɨɤɨɜɟɢɤɨɪɢɬɨɛɪɚɧɟɦɨɠɟɫɟɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɬɢ
ɞɚʁɟɫɬɟɧɫɤɚɦɚɫɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɚɫɚɞɟɛʂɢɧɨɦɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɨɞ-ɰɦɭɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚɞɨɦɢɪɟɬɤɨ
ɩɪɟɤɨɦɭɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚ
ɆɟɻɭɫɥɨʁɧɟɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɫɚɚɡɢɦɭɬɨɦɩɚɞɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɨɞÛ-ÛɢɩɚɞɧɢɦɭɝɥɨɦɨɞÛ-
Û Ɇɟɻɭɫɥɨʁɧɟ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟ ɫɭ ɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦ ɭ ɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚ ɫɚ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ ɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɨɦ
ɢɫɩɭɧɨɦɪɟɬɤɨɛɟɡɢɫɩɭɧɟɚɲɢɪɢɧɟɦɟɻɭɫɥɨʁɧɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚʁɟ-ɦɦɌɨɫɭɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ
269
ɦɚɥɨɯɪɚɩɚɜɟɢɝɪɭɛɟɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɭɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚɞɨɤɫɭɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɦɟɻɭɫɥɨʁɧɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ
ɭɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟɝɥɚɬɤɟɢɪɟɬɤɨɬɚɥɚɫɚɫɬɟ
ɋɬɟɧɫɤɚ ɦɚɫɚ ʁɟ ɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦ ɩɨɪɟɞ ɦɟɻɭɫɥɨʁɧɢɯ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ɢɡɞɟʂɟɧɚ ɧɚ ɬɪɢ ɫɢɫɬɟɦɚ
ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ
ɉɪɜɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ
ɉɪɜɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚʁɟɫɚɚɡɢɦɭɬɨɦɩɚɞɚɨɞÛ-ÛɢɩɚɞɨɦɨɞÛɞɨÛɇɚɢɦɟ
ɬɨɤɨɦɩɪɚʄɟʃɚɧɟɤɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɭɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧɚʁɟɩɪɨɦɟɧɚɚɡɢɦɭɬɚɨɜɨɝ
ɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɬɚɤɨɞɚʁɟɨɜɚʁɫɢɫɬɟɦɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧɢɫɚɚɡɢɦɭɬɨɦɩɚɞɚɨɞ
Û-ÛɞɨɤɫɟɩɚɞɧɢɭɝɚɨɧɢʁɟɦɟʃɚɨɢɛɢɨʁɟɢɡɦɟɻɭÛɢÛɈɜɟɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɧɚ
ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢɲɢɪɨɤɟɢɞɨɰɦɞɨɤɫɭɞɭɛʂɟɲɢɪɢɧɟɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨɞɨɦɦɇɚʁɱɟɲʄɟɫɭ
ɝɪɭɛɢɯɢɯɪɚɩɚɜɢɯɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚɫɚɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɨɦɢɫɩɭɧɨɦɍɤɨɪɢɬɭɪɟɤɟʁɟ
ɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧ ɦɨɝɭʄɢ ɪɚɫɟɞ ɫɚ ɩɚɞɨɦ ɨɞ Û ɍ ɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚ ɧɚ ɤɨɫɢɧɚɦɚ ɨɜɟ
ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɥɚɤɨɭɨɱʂɢɜɟɤɚɨɢɩɪɨɦɟɧɚɩɪɚɜɰɚʃɢɯɨɜɨɝɩɪɭɠɚʃɚ
ɍɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚɩɪɚʄɟʃɟɨɜɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚʁɟɩɪɚɤɬɢɱɧɨɧɟɦɨɝɭʄɟʁɟɪɫɭɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɭɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚ
ɤɪɚɬɤɟ Ɉɜɟ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟ ɭ ɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚ ɫɭ ɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ ɦɟɬɚɪɫɤɟ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ ɝɥɚɬɤɢɯ ɩɨɜɪɲɢ
ɲɢɪɢɧɟɞɨɦɦɪɟɬɤɨɩɪɟɤɨ
ɍ ɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚ ɫɟ ɩɨʁɚɜʂɭʁɭ ɧɚ ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭ ɨɞ ɞɨ ɦ ɞɨɤ ʁɟ ɭɱɟɫɬɚɥɨɫɬ
ɩɨʁɚɜʂɢɜɚʃɚɨɜɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɧɚɪɨɱɢɬɨɭɰɪɜɟɧɢɦɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚɜɟʄɚ
Ⱦɪɭɝɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ
ɋɢɫɬɟɦ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ɫɚ ɚɡɢɦɭɬɨɦ ɩɚɞɚ -Û ɢ ɩɚɞɧɢɦ ɭɝɥɨɦ ɨɞ -Û ɤɚɨ ɢ ɤɨɞ
ɩɪɟɬɯɨɞɧɢɯ ɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚɬɚɤɨɫɟɢɨɜɚʁɫɢɫɬɟɦɦɨɠɟɩɪɚɬɢɬɢɭɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚɞɨɤʁɟ
ɭɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚɬɨɩɪɚɤɬɢɱɧɨɧɟɦɨɝɭʄɟɍɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚɨɜɚʁɫɢɫɬɟɦɧɚɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢʁɟɲɢɪɢɧɟ
ɢɞɨɰɦɢɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟɨɞɨɤɨɦɨɞɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɛɟɡɢɫɩɭɧɟɋɚɞɭɛɢɧɨɦ
ɲɢɪɢɧɚ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ɫɟ ɫɦɚʃɭʁɟ ɢ ɞɨɫɬɢɠɟ ɲɢɪɢɧɭ ɞɨ ɦɦ ɪɟɬɤɨ ɜɟʄɭ ɫɚ ɢɫɩɭɧɨɦ
ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨɦɛɨʁɟɧɟɲɬɨɬɚɦɧɢʁɟɨɞɛɨʁɟɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɉɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɫɭɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ
ɯɪɚɩɚɜɟ ɢ ɝɪɭɛɟ ɚ ɭ ɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚ ɢɫɩɪɟɤɢɞɚɧɟ ɬɚɥɚɫɚɫɬɟ ɢ ɝɥɚɬɤɟ ɉɨʁɚɜʂɭʁɭ ɫɟ ɧɚ
ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭɨɞɦɞɨɦɢɩɪɟɫɟɰɚʁɭɬɨɤɪɟɤɟɧɚɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɦɦɟɫɬɭɩɨɞɭɝɥɨɦɨɞɨɤɨ
75-Û
Ɍɪɟʄɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ
Ɍɪɟʄɢ ɫɢɫɬɟɦ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ʁɟ ɫɚ ɚɡɢɦɭɬɨɦ ɩɚɞɚ ɨɞ -Û ɢ ɩɚɞɧɢɦ ɭɝɥɨɦ ɨɞ -Û
ɉɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɨɜɨɝɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɫɭɞɨɫɬɚɪɟɻɟɨɞɩɪɟɬɯɨɞɧɚɞɜɚɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɍɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚɫɭɥɚɤɨ
ɭɨɱʂɢɜɟɞɨɤɢɯʁɟɭɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚɬɟɲɤɨɩɪɚɬɢɬɢɍɩɟɲɱɚɪɢɦɚɫɭɬɨɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɲɢɪɢɧɟ
ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨ ɞɨ ɦɦ ɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦ ɝɪɭɛɢɯ ɢ ɯɪɚɩɚɜɢɯ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚ ɞɨɤ ɫɭ ɭ ɩɟɥɢɬɢɦɚ
ɢɫɩɪɟɤɢɞɚɧɢɯɢɝɥɚɬɤɢɯɩɨɜɪɲɢɢɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦɫɭɤɪɚɬɤɟɞɭɠɢɧɟɞɨɦ
270
ɂɇɀȿȵȿɊɋɄɈȽȿɈɅɈɒɄȺɂɏɂȾɊɈȽȿɈɅɈɒɄȺɋȼɈȳɋɌȼȺ
ɈɋɇɈȼɇȿɋɌȿɇȿ
ɌɟɪɟɧɧɚɦɟɫɬɭɛɪɚɧɟɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧʁɟɨɞɪɟɥɚɬɢɜɧɨɩɪɚɜɢɥɧɟɫɦɟɧɟɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɢɩɟɥɢɬɚɈɜɟ
ɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟ ɫɟ ɩɪɚɜɢɥɧɨ ɧɚɞɨɜɟɡɭʁɭ ɧɚ ɨɛɟ ɨɛɚɥɟ ɢ ɭ ɤɨɪɢɬɭ ɪɟɤɟ ɢ ɦɟɫɬɢɦɢɱɧɨ ɫɭ
ɩɪɟɤɪɢɜɟɧɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚɤɜɚɪɬɚɪɧɢɯɧɚɫɥɚɝɚɚɥɭɜɢɨɧɢɫɢɩɚɪɫɤɢɞɟɥɭɜɢʁɭɦ
ɉɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɦɟɫɬɨɛɪɚɧɟ ɨɛɪɚɡɨɜɚɧɨʁɟɨɞɫɥɟɞɟʄɢɯɥɢɬɨɥɨɲɤɢɯɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ
Ɋɟɰɟɧɬɧɢɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɢɢ
ɉɟɲɱɚɪɢɢɩɟɥɢɬɢ
Ɇɟɫɬɢɦɢɱɧɨɭɤɨɪɢɬɭɪɟɤɟɩɨɫɬɨʁɟɤɜɚɪɬɚɪɧɟɧɚɫɥɚɝɟɤɨʁɟɮɨɪɦɢɪɚʁɭɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨ–
ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɟ ɢɥɢ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ–ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɟ ɚɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɟ ɧɚɫɥɚɝɟ ɦɚɥɟ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɟ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɭ
ɱɟɫɬɨɩɪɟɤɢɧɭɬɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚɩɟɥɢɬɚɢɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɇɚɩɚɞɢɧɚɦɚɬɚɤɨɻɟɩɨɫɬɨʁɟɦɟɫɬɢɦɢɱɧɟ
ɤɜɚɪɬɚɪɧɟɧɚɫɥɚɝɟɫɢɩɚɪɫɤɨ-ɞɟɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɢɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɢɦɚɥɟɞɟɛʂɢɧɟ
ɌɟɦɟʂɧɢɦɚɫɢɜɛɪɚɧɟÄɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ´ɩɨɞɟʂɟɧʁɟɭɬɪɢɢɧɠɟʃɟɪɫɤɨ– ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɟɡɨɧɟ
ɉɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɚɡɨɧɚɤɨʁɚɫɟɫɚɫɬɨʁɢɨɞɞɪɨɛɢɧɫɤɨɝɢɪɚɫɩɚɞɧɭɬɨɝɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɫɢɩɚɪɫɤɨ-
ɞɟɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɢɚɥɭɜɢʁɨɧɚ ɢɢɡɦɟʃɟɧɢɯɩɟɥɢɬɚɢɪɟɻɟɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɌɨɫɭɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɢɫɚRQD
ɮɚɤɬɨɪɨɦ - ɤɨʁɢ ɫɭ ɫɥɚɛɢɯ ɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɚ ɡɚ ɬɟɦɟʂɟʃɟ
ɛɪɚɧɟ
ɇɚ ɥɟɜɨʁ ɨɛɚɥɢ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɚ ɨɜɨɝ ɫɥɨʁɚ ɢɡɧɨɫɢ ɦ ɢ ɩɨɜɟɡɚɧɚ ʁɟ ɫɚ ɢɡɪɚɠɚʁɧɢʁɢɦ
ɫɢɩɚɪɫɤɨ-ɞɟɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɢɧɚɧɨɫɨɦɇɚɞɟɫɧɨʁɨɛɚɥɢɞɟɛʂɢɧɚɨɜɨɝɫɥɨʁɚʁɟɨɞɞɨ
ɦɍɞɧɭɞɨɥɢɧɟɞɟɛʂɢɧɚɨɜɨɝɫɥɨʁɚɫɟɤɪɟʄɟɨɞɦɞɨɦɋɬɟɧɫɤɚɦɚɫɚʁɟɫɥɚɛɨɝ
ɤɜɚɥɢɬɟɬɚɡɚɬɟɦɟʂɟʃɟɛɪɚɧɟɚɢɫɤɨɩʁɟɦɨɝɭʄɛɟɡɭɩɨɬɪɟɛɟɛɚɝɟɪɚɱɟɤɢʄɚɪɚɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ
ɛɟɡɭɩɨɬɪɟɛɟɟɤɫɩɥɨɡɢɜɚ
ɂɫɩɨɞɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɟɡɨɧɟɧɚɥɚɡɢɫɟɫɪɟɞʃɚɡɨɧɚɤɨʁɚɫɟɫɚɫɬɨʁɢɨɞɫɦɟʃɢɜɚʃɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ
ɩɟɥɢɬɚɢɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɤɨʁɢɢɦɚʁɭɩɨɜɨʂɧɟɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɟɡɚɮɭɧɞɢɪɚʃɟɛɪɚɧɟɩɨɩɢɬɚʃɭ
ɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɫɬɢɢɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɛɢɥɧɨɫɬɢɚɥɢɫɚɜɢɫɨɤɢɦɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɦɚɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢɤɨʁɟɫɟ
ɤɪɟʄɭ ɨɞ/Xɞɨ/X
ɍɨɜɨʁɡɨɧɢ54'ɮɚɤɬɨɪʁɟɜɟɨɦɚɩɪɨɦɟɧʂɢɜɢɤɪɟʄɟɫɟɨɞɞɨɧɟɤɚɞɢ
ɋɬɟɧɚʁɟɫɪɟɞʃɟɝɤɜɚɥɢɬɟɬɚɡɚɢɫɤɨɩʁɟɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɚɭɩɨɬɪɟɛɚɛɚɝɟɪɚɱɟɤɢʄɚɪɚɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ
ɭɩɨɬɪɟɛɚɟɤɫɩɥɨɡɢɜɚ
ȾɟɛʂɢɧɚɨɜɟɫɪɟɞʃɟɡɨɧɟɤɪɟʄɟɫɟɨɞɞɨɦɧɚɨɛɚɥɚɦɚɢɨɞɞɨPɭɞɧɭ
ɞɨɥɢɧɟ
Ⱦɨʃɚɡɨɧɚɬɚɤɨɻɟɫɟɫɚɫɬɨʁɢɨɞɩɟɥɢɬɫɤɢɯɢɩɟɲɱɚɪɫɤɢɯɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɍɨɜɨʁɡɨɧɢ54'
ɮɚɤɬɨɪʁɟɩɪɨɦɟɧʂɢɜɢɤɪɟʄɟɫɟɨɞɞɨɭɩɢɬɚʃɭʁɟɦɚɫɢɜɨɞɫɪɟɞʃɟɝɞɨɜɟɨɦɚ
ɞɨɛɪɨɝɤɜɚɥɢɬɟɬɚ ȼɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɭɞɨʃɨʁɡɨɧɢɧɟɩɪɟɥɚɡɢ/X
ɍɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɯɢɞɪɨɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɯɫɜɨʁɫɬɚɜɚɚɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɅɢɠɨɧɨɜɢɯɨɩɢɬɚɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢ
ɤɨʁɢ ɫɭ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɢ ɭ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɢɦ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚ ɧɚ ɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɦ ɩɪɨɮɢɥɭ ɦɨɠɟ ɫɟ
ɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢɞɚʁɟɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɧɚɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɦɩɪɨɮɢɥɭɝɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɨɜɢɫɨɤɚɩɨɝɨɬɨɜɨ
ɭ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɢɦ ɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɢɦ ɡɨɧɚɦɚ ɞɨ ɞɭɛɢɧɟ ɨɞ – P ɋɚ ɞɭɛɢɧɨɦ
ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɫɟɫɦɚʃɭʁɟɌɟɦɟʂɧɢɦɚɫɢɜɫɟɫɚɫɬɨʁɢɤɚɤɨʁɟɜɟʄɩɨɦɟɧɭɬɨɨɞɫɦɟɧɟ
ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɩɟɲɱɚɪɚɢɩɟɥɢɬɚɉɚɞɫɥɨʁɟɜɚʁɟɝɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɨɩɪɟɦɚɭɡɜɨɞɧɨʁɫɬɪɚɧɢɩɨɝɨɞɭʁɟ
ɜɨɞɨɧɟɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢɛɪɚɧɟɢɚɤɭɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɟ
271
ɋɥɢɤɚ 2. ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɩɪɟɫɟɤɩɨɨɫɢɛɪɚɧɟ
Figure 2. geological profile along the axis of the dam
ɂȵȿɄɐɂɈɇȺɁȺȼȿɋȺ
Ʉɚɤɨ ʁɟ ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬ ɩɟɲɱɚɪɚ ɢ ɩɟɥɢɬɚ ɩɨɜɟʄɚɧɚ ɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɨ ʁɟ ɧɚ ɚɞɟɤɜɚɬɚɧ
ɧɚɱɢɧɬɨɤɨɦɪɚɞɧɨɝɜɟɤɚɨɛʁɟɤɬɚɨɛɟɡɛɟɞɢɬɢɦɢɧɢɦɚɥɧɨɨɬɢɰɚʃɟɜɨɞɟɤɪɨɡɬɟɦɟʂɟɢ
ɫɬɟɧɫɤɭ ɦɚɫɭ Ɉɜɨ ʄɟ ɫɟ ɩɨɫɬɢʄɢ ɢɡɪɚɞɨɦ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɡɚɜɟɫɟ ɤɨʁɚ ʄɟ ɫɟ ɢɡɜɟɫɬɢ ɢɡ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɞɪɟɧɚɠɧɟɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟɤɨʁɚɫɟɧɚɥɚɡɢɭɭɡɜɨɞɧɨɦɞɟɥɭɬɟɥɚɛɪɚɧɟ
ɂʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɚɡɚɜɟɫɚʄɟɫɟɡɚɜɪɲɢɬɢɭɞɨʃɨʁɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɨʁɡɨɧɢʃɟɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɚɧɚɨɛɚɥɢ
ɞɨɫɬɢɠɟɞɭɛɢɧɭɨɞ m – 35 Pɚɨɞ m – 25 PɭɞɧɭɞɨɥɢɧɟɈɜɢɦɧɚɱɢɧɨɦʄɟɫɟ
ɨɛɟɡɛɟɞɢɬɢɩɪɨɞɢɪɚʃɟɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɭɫɬɟɧɭɫɚɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɲʄɭɦɚʃɨɦɨɞ Lu.
ɂʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɚɡɚɜɟɫɚʄɟɛɢɬɢɩɪɨɞɭɠɟɧɚɧɚɥɟɜɨɦɛɨɤɭɢɡɜɚɧɬɟɥɚɛɪɚɧɟɡɚɨɤɨɦɢ
ɡɚɤɨɲɟɧɚɩɨɞɭɝɥɨɦɨɞÛɩɪɟɦɚɚɤɭɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɢɭɨɞɧɨɫɭɧɚɨɫɭɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɢɞɪɟɧɚɠɧɟ
ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ
Ƚɟɨɥɨɲɤɚɝɪɚɻɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɧɚɦɟɫɬɭɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝɩɨʂɚ1
Ƚɟɨɥɨɲɤɚɝɪɚɻɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɧɚɦɟɫɬɭɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝɩɨʂɚ1 ʁɟɯɟɬɟɪɨɝɟɧɚ
ɤɚɤɨɩɨɥɢɬɨɥɨɲɤɨɦɫɚɫɬɚɜɭɬɚɤɨɢɩɨɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɨɫɬɢɉɪɨɛɧɨɩɨʂɟɛɪ1 ɢɡɝɪɚɻɭʁɭ, ɤɚɨ
ɢ ɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨ ɦɟɫɬɨ ɛɪɚɧɟ, ɩɟɲɱɚɪɢ ɫɚ ɩɪɨɫɥɨʁɰɢɦɚ ɢ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚ ɰɪɜɟɧɢɯ ɢ ɡɟɥɟɧɢɯ
ɩɟɥɢɬɚ
ɍɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɨʁɡɨɧɢɭɤɨɧɬɚɤɬɭɫɚɜɚɡɞɭɯɨɦɰɪɜɟɧɢɢɡɟɥɟɧɢɩɟɥɢɬɢɫɟɚɥɬɟɪɢɲɭɞɨɤ
ɫɟ ɫɚ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟɦ ɞɭɛɢɧɟ ɧɚʁɱɟɲʄɟ ɩɨɛɨʂɲɚɜɚʁɭ ɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɟ ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɟ
ɫɬɟɧɫɤɟɦɚɫɟɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭʁɟɡɝɪɚɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɭɡɨɧɢɧɟɚɥɬɟɪɢɫɚɧɢɯɩɟɲɱɚɪɚ
ɢ ɩɟɥɢɬɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɧɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬɢ
ɦɟɬɨɞɨɦɅɢɠɨɧɭɩɪɨɫɟɤɭɦɚʃɟɨɞ/Xɤɚɨɢɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭ54'ɨɞ-ɪɟɬɤɨ
ɫɬɟɧɚ ɫɥɚɛɨ ɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɚ ɫɥɢɤɚ ɦɨɠɟ ɫɟ ɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɬɢ ɞɚ ʁɟ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɚ ɦɚɫɚ ɫɥɚɛɨ
ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚ
Ⱥɧɚɥɢɡɢɪɚʁɭʄɢɩɨɞɚɬɤɟɫɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɩɨʂɚɥɨɤɚɥɧɨɫɭɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧɟɡɨɧɟɫɚɩɨɜɟʄɚɧɨɦ
ɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɨɲʄɭ ɲɬɨ ʁɟ ɢ ɩɨɬɜɪɻɟɧɨ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢ
ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɜɟʄɟ ɨɞ /X Ɉɜɟ ɡɨɧɟ ɫɭ ɡɚɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚɧɟ ɭ ɩɪɨɰɟɫɭ ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝɩɨʂɚ1.
272
ɂɡɜɨɻɟʃɟ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝɩɨʂɚ
ɉɪɨɛɧɨ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨ ɩɨʂɟ ɛɪ ɧɚ ɛɪɚɧɢ ɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ ɥɨɰɢɪɚɧɨ ʁɟ ɧɚ ɞɟɫɧɨʁ ɨɛɚɥɢ ɪɟɤɟ
ɆCɁɢ ɍɤɭɩɧɚ ɞɭɠɢɧɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝ ɩɨʂɚ 1 ʁɟ ɦ Ɋɚɞɨɜɢ ɧɚ ɛɭɲɟʃɭ ɢ
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɭ ɧɚ ɨɜɨʁ ɩɪɨɛɧɨʁ ɞɟɨɧɢɰɢ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɢ ɫɭ ɨɞ 0 ɞɨ 1.2014.
ɝɨɞɢɧɟ
ɉɪɜɨɫɭɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɪɟɩɟɪɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ)5Pe-1 i FRPe-9 ɫɚʁɟɡɝɪɨɜɚʃɟɦɢɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɦ
ɨɩɢɬɚ ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬɢ Ʌɢɠɨɧ ɢ ɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɢɦ ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɟɦ ɨɞ m. ɂɡɦɟɻɭ
ɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɯ ʁɟ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ʁɟɞɧɚ ɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɚ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ )RP- ɫɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɦ
ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬɢ Ʌɢɠɨɧ ɇɚɤɨɧ ɬɨɝɚ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟ ɫɭ ɞɜɟ ɞɪɭɝɟ ɫɟɤɭɧɞɚɪɧɟ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟFRPe-ɢ)RPe-7 ɧɚɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭɨɞɦɟɬɚɪɚɢɡɦɟɻɭɪɟɩɟɪɧɟɢɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɟ ˄
ɬɨɤɭ ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚ ɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɯ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ )53H-1 i FRPe- ɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧɚ ɫɭ ɜɟɥɢɤɚ
ɩɪɢɦɚʃɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɤɨʁɚʁɟɩɪɚʄɟɧɚɜɟɥɢɤɢɦɨɫɰɢɥɚɰɢʁɚɦɚɢɡɦɟɻɭɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ
ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɚɢɩɪɨɬɨɤɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɈɛɡɢɪɨɦɞɚʁɟɤɨɪɢɲʄɟɧɚɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɚɚɩɚɪɚɬɭɪɚ
ɛɢɥɨʁɟɨɦɨɝɭʄɟɧɨɞɨɛɪɨɩɪɚʄɟʃɟɢɪɟɚɥɧɨɫɚɝɥɟɞɚɜɚʃɟɟɮɟɤɬɚɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚɭɯɨɞɭ
ɩɪɢ ɱɟɦɭ ɫɭ ɡɚɛɟɥɟɠɟɧɚ ɜɟɥɢɤɚ ɨɫɰɢɥɨɜɚʃɚ ɩɪɨɬɨɤɚ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɩɪɢ ɧɢɫɤɢɦ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɦ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢɦɚ Ɉɜɨ ʁɟ ɛɢɨ ɱɟɫɬ ɫɥɭɱɚʁ ɩɪɢɥɢɤɨɦ ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɯ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɚɩɨɞɚɬɚɤɫɚɦɩɨɫɟɛɢɝɨɜɨɪɢɞɚʁɟɫɬɟɧɫɤɚɦɚɫɚɞɨɛɪɨɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɚ ɢɞɚɫɭ
ɱɟɫɬɢ ɟɮɟɤɬɢ ɥɨɦɚ ɫɬɟɧɟ ɩɪɢ ɩɪɢɪɚɲɬɚʁɭ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɚ Ɍɚɤɨɻɟ ɩɪɢɥɢɤɨɦ
ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɫɟɤɭɧɞɚɪɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ FPe ɧɚ ɟɬɚɠɢ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɢ ɦ ɭ ɬɨɤɭ ɨɩɢɬɚ
ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢ ɜɨɞɚ ɫɟ ɩɨʁɚɜɢɥɚ ɧɚ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɦ ɧɢɡɜɨɞɧɨ ɨɞ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ ɭ ɡɚɫɟɤɭ ɩɭɬɚ ɢ ɤɨɫɢɧɟ ɤɨɧɬɚɤɬ ɜɨɞɨɩɪɩɭɫɧɢɯ ɩɟɲɱɚɪɚ ɢ ɫɥɚɛɨ
ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɢɯɰɪɜɟɧɢɯɩɟɥɢɬɚ
ɂɡɦɟɻɭ ɪɟɩɟɪɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ FRPe-1 ɢ ɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɟ )RPe- ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟ ɫɭ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ ɧɚ ɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɨɦ ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭ ɨɞ ɦ ɞɨɤ ɫɟ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɭ
ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɟ )RPe- ɢ ɪɟɩɟɪɧɟ )5Pe-9 ɧɚɥɚɡɟ ɧɚ ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭ ɨɞ P ɇɚɤɨɧ
ɡɚɜɪɲɟɬɤɚɫɟɤɭɧɞɚɪɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɫɭɬɟɪɰɢʁɚɪɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ. Ɉɞɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɢɯ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɱɟɬɜɪɬɟ ɮɚɡɟ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟ ɫɭ ɬɪɢ )3 H )3 H L )3 H ɞɨɤ ɨɫɬɚɥɟ ɧɢɫɭ
ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟ
ɉɪɨɛɧɨɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɩɨʂɟʁɟɩɪɨɞɭɠɟɧɨɨɞɤɨɧɬɚɤɬɚ ɩɭɬɚɞɨɤɨɫɢɧɟɩɭɬɚɍɬɨɦɞɟɥɭ
ɭɪɚɻɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɭ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟ ɭɞɚɪɧɢɦ ɛɭɲɟʃɟɦ ɫɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɦ VDP-ɚ
(Lugeonɋɜɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟɫɭɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɩɨɞɭɝɥɨɦɨɞ0 ɭɨɞɧɨɫɭɧɚɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɭ. ɇɚɤɨɧ
ɡɚɜɪɲɟɬɤɚ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ʁɟ ʁɟɞɧɚ ɤɨɧɬɪɨɥɧɚ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ IFC ɫɚ ʁɟɡɝɪɨɜɚʃɟɦ ɢ
ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɦVDP (Lugeon).
Ɉɞɧɨɫɰɟɦɟɧɬɚɢɜɨɞɟʁɟɫɚɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚɉɪɢɥɢɤɨɦɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚɭɫɢɬɭɚɰɢʁɚɦɚɤɚɞɚ
ʁɟɚɩɫɨɪɛɰɢʁɚɫɭɜɟɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɛɢɥɚɜɟʄɚɨɞNJP¶ɨɤɨ 70Oɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟ
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚɧɨ ʁɟ ɫɚ ɝɭɲʄɨɦ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦ ɦɚɫɨɦ ɨɞɧɨɫɚ ɰɟɦɟɧɬɜɨɞɚ ɫɚ
ɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚ ɢ ɚɤɨ ʁɟ ɚɩɫɨɪɛɰɢʁɚ ɛɢɥɚ ɜɟʄɚ ɨɞ NJP¶ ɨɤɨ1400 l ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ mase)
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɟʁɟɛɢɥɨɡɚɭɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɨ ɚɩɨɫɬɭɩɚɤɧɚɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɩɨɫɥɟɫɚɬɢ.
ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɭɤɭɩɧɨ 642,20 ɦ¶ ɛɭɲɟʃɚ Ɉɞ ɬɨɝɚ ʁɟ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨ 71,00 ɦ¶ ɨɤɨ ɦ¶ ɛɟɡ
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚ ʁɟɪɬɟɪɟɧɧɚɤɨɦɟʁɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨɩɪɨɛɧɨɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɩɨʂɟʁɟɡɧɚɬɧɨɜɢɲɢɨɞ
ɧɚʁɜɢɲɟɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɟɤɨɬɟɛɭɞɭʄɟɝʁɟɡɟɪɚ ɉɟɬ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɫɭɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɫɚʁɟɡɝɪɨɜɚʃɟɦ
ɞɨɤɫɭɨɫɬɚɥɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɭɞɚɪɧɢɦɛɭɲɟʃɟɦɍ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚ)35-1, FPR-13, FP-5, FC-1 ɢ
FC-2 ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɢɫɭɨɩɢɬɢɅɢɠɨɧɚɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɬɢɯɨɩɢɬɚɞɚɬɢɫɭɭɧɚɪɟɞɧɨʁɬɚɛɟɥɢ
273
ɌɚɛɟɥɚɛɪȾɭɛɢɧɚɟɬɚɠɚɢɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɅɢɠɨɧɚ
Table No.1. Depth floors and the value of the Lugeon
Ȼɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ Ȼɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ Ȼɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ Ȼɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ

FRPe-1 FRPe-5 FRPe-9 FC-1
ȿɬɚɠɚ Ʌɢɠɨɧ ȿɬɚɠɚ Ʌɢɠɨɧ ȿɬɚɠɚ Ʌɢɠɨɧ ȿɬɚɠɚ Ʌɢɠɨɧ
ɦ ɦ ɦ ɦ
4,7-9,7 7,80 9,0-12,0 7,0 7,0-12,0 45,00 10,0-15,0 18,60
9,7-14,7 33,70 12,0-17,0 34,1 12,0-17,0 33,00 15,0-20,0 15,80
14,7-19,7 2,40 17,00-22,0 5,40 17,0-22,0 0,80 20,0-25,0 15,7
19,7-24,7 29,8 22,0-27,0 9,9 22,0-27,0 29,60 25,0-30,0 28,5
24,7-29,7 0,20 27,0-30,0 <1 27,0-30,0 0,10
29,7-34,7 0,90 30,0-35,0 0,10
37,7-42,7 0,7 35,0-40,0 0,10
ɂɡɬɚɛɟɥɟɫɟɦɨɠɟɜɢɞɟɬɢɞɚ ɫɭɨɩɢɬɢɭɫɩɟɥɢɨɫɢɦɭɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɢɎɉ-ɭɟɬɚɠɢɨɞ-ɦ
ɝɞɟʁɟɜɨɞɚɢɡɥɚɡɢɥɚɭɨɤɨɥɧɢɬɟɪɟɧɩɚʁɟɩɚɤɟɪɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɚɧɧɚɚɩɨɬɨɦɧɚɞɚɛɢɫɟ
ɢɡɜɟɨɨɩɢɬɌɚɤɨɻɟɫɟɦɨɠɟɜɢɞɟɬɢɞɚ ɫɭɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɅɢɠɨɧɚɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦɦɚɥɟ
ɇɚɫɥɢɰɢɛɪ ɞɚɬɢɫɭɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚɤɨɥɢɱɢɧɟɭɬɪɨɲɟɧɟɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟ
ɨɞɧɨɫɧɨɤɨɥɢɱɢɧɟɭɬɪɨɲɟɧɨɝɰɟɦɟɧɬɚɢɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚɩɨɦɟɬɪɭɞɭɠɧɨɦɡɚɫɜɚɤɭɟɬɚɠɭ
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚɛɪ3 ɍɬɪɨɲɚɤɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɧɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɦɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦɩɨʂɭ
Figure 3. Consumption of grout at the test area injection
274
ɉɪɨɫɟɱɧɨʁɟɡɚɤɨɦɩɥɟɬɧɨɩɪɨɛɧɨɩɨʂɟɭɬɪɨɲɟɧɨɤɝɰɟɦɚɧɬɚɢɤɝɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚ
ɩɨɦɟɬɪɭɞɭɠɧɨɦ
ɂʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɟ
ɂʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɟ ʁɟ ɡɚɩɨɱɟɬɨ ɫɚ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦ ɦɚɫɨɦ ɜɟʄɟɝ ɪɚɡɪɟɻɟʃɚ ɱɢʁɢ ɜɨɞɨɰɟɦɟɧɬɧɢ
ɮɚɤɬɨɪ ɢɡɧɨɫɢ ȼɐ ɫɚ ɞɨɞɚɬɤɨɦ ɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚ Ȼɢɥɨ ʁɟ ɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɨ ɞɚ ɫɭ ɭ
ɫɥɭɱɚʁɭ ɜɟʄɢɯ ɭɬɪɨɲɚɤɚ ɩɪɟɤɨ O ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɩɨ ɟɬɚɠɢ ɩɪɟɻɟ ɧɚ ɝɭɲʄɟ
ɰɟɦɟɧɬɧɟ ɫɭɫɩɟɧɡɢʁɟ ɫɚ ɜɨɞɨɰɟɦɟɧɬɧɢɦ ɮɚɤɬɨɪɨɦ ȼɐ ɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚ Ⱥɤɨ
ɩɨɫɥɟ ɨɜɨɝ ɩɪɨɝɭɲʄɟʃɚ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɢ ɧɚɤɨɧ ɭɬɪɨɲɟɧɢɯ ɧɚɪɟɞɧɢɯ O
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɧɟɞɨɻɟɞɨɡɚɞɨɜɨʂɟʃɚɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɚɡɚɫɢʄɟʃɚɟɬɚɠɟɩɪɟʄɢʄɟ ɫɟɧɚ
ʁɨɲɝɭɲʄɟɰɟɦɟɧɬɧɟɫɭɫɩɟɧɡɢʁɟɫɦɚʃɟʃɟɦɜɨɞɨ-ɰɟɦɟɧɬɧɨɝɮɚɤɬɨɪɚȼɐ
ɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚ ɍ ɫɥɭɱɚʁɭ ɞɚ ɧɚɤɨɧ ɢ ɨɜɨɝ ɩɪɨɝɭɲʄɟʃɚ ɧɟ ɞɨɥɚɡɢ ɞɨ ɡɚɞɨɜɨʂɟʃɚ
ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɚ ɡɚɫɢʄɟʃɚ ɟɬɚɠɟ ɢ ɧɚɤɨɧ ɭɬɪɨɲɟɧɢɯ ɧɚɪɟɞɧɢɯ ɥ ɡɚɭɫɬɚɜɢʄɟ ɫɟ
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɟ ɭ ɬɪɚʁɚʃɭ ɨɞ ɫɚɬɢ ɇɚɤɨɧ ɨɜɨɝ ɩɪɟɤɢɞɚ ɧɚɫɬɚɜɢʄɟ ɫɟ ɩɪɨɰɟɫ
ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚɫɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦɦɚɫɨɦȼɐ ɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚ ɍɩɨɬɪɟɛɢʄɟɫɟɰɟɦɟɧɬ
CHF – CEM III/A 42.5N.
ɇɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɦ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦ ɩɨʂɭ ɛɪ ɤɨɧɫɬɚɬɨɜɚɧɨ ʁɟ ɞɚ ɫɭ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢ
ɜɟɥɢɤɢɢɞɚɞɨɥɚɡɢɞɨɥɨɦɚɫɬɟɧɫɤɟɦɚɫɟɩɚɫɭɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢɪɟɞɭɤɨɜɚɧɢɍɧɚɪɟɞɧɨʁɬɚɛɟɥɢ
ɞɚɬɢɫɭɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɢɢɪɟɞɭɤɨɜɚɧɢɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢɧɚɨɛɚɩɪɨɛɧɚɩɨʂɚ
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚɛɪ Ɋɟɞɭɤɨɜɚɧɢɡɚɜɪɲɧɢɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢ
Table No.2 Reduced the final injection under-pressure
ȺɇȺɅɂɁȺɂȵȿɄɐɂɈɇɂɏɉɊɂɌɂɋȺɄȺɍɉɊɈȻɇɈɆɉɈȴɍ
ɉɪɨɩɢɫɚɧɢɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ
Ⱦɭɛɢɧɚ Ɋɟɞɭɤɰɢʁɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ
Ɋɞɛɪɨʁ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢɭɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɭ
(m) ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚɛɚɪ
ɛɚɪ
1 0-5 5 2
2 5-10 8.5 5
3 10 -15 12 8.5
4 15 -20 15.5 12
5 20 - 25 19 15.5
6 25 - 30 20 19
7 >30 20 20
ȿɬɚɠɚ ɫɟ ɫɦɚɬɪɚ ɡɚɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚɧɨɦ ɤɚɞɚ ɭɬɪɨɲɚɤ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɝɭɫɬɢɧɟ ɫɚ ɤɨʁɨɦ ʁɟ
ɩɨɱɟɥɨ ɡɚɫɢʄɟʃɟ ɟɬɚɠɚ ɦɚʃɟ ɨɞ Om
ɡɚ ɩɟɪɢɨɞ ɨɞ ɦɢɧɭɬɚ ɚ ɩɨɞ ɡɚɜɪɲɧɢɦ
ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚ ɡɚɬɭɟɬɚɠɭ.
275
ɁȺɄȴɍɑȺɄ
ɇɚɛɪɚɧɢɋɟɤɥɚɮɚɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɚʁɟɢɡɪɚɞɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɡɚɜɟɫɟɭɨɤɜɢɪɭɤɨʁɟɫɭɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɚ
ɢɞɜɚɩɪɨɛɧɚɩɨʂɚ
ɇɚɥɟɜɨʁ ɨɛɚɥɢɪɟɤɟɆ¶Ɂɢɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨʁɟɩɪɨɛɧɨɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɩɨʂɟɛɪ 1
ɍɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɨʁɝɪɚɻɢɬɟɪɟɧɚɩɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨɝɦɟɫɬɚɛɪɚɧɟɢɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɩɨʂɚɭɱɟɫɬɜɭʁɭɩɟɲɱɚɪɢ
ɢɡɟɥɟɧɢɢɰɪɜɟɧɢɩɟɥɢɬɢɉɚɞɦɟɻɭɫɥɨʁɧɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚʁɟɭɡɜɨɞɧɨ
ɉɪɟɝɪɚɞɧɨ ɦɟɫɬɨ ʁɟ ɩɨɞɟʂɟɧɨ ɭ ɬɪɢ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɟ ɡɨɧɟ ɧɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɜɨɞɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɧɨɫɬɢ
ɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɨɫɬɢɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɯɮɚɤɬɨɪɚɢɞɪ
Ⱦɭɠɢɧɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɩɨʂɚʁɟɦ
ɇɚɜɟʄɢɧɢɟɬɚɠɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɢɪɟɩɟɪɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɪɟɝɢɫɬɪɨɜɚɧɢɫɭɧɢɫɤɢɭɬɪɨɲɰɢ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɦɚʃɟɨɞɤɝɦ¶ɫɭɜɟɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟ
ɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɚɧɚɥɢɡɟɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚɧɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɦɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɦɩɨʂɭ1ɩɪɨɢɡɢɥɚɡɢ
ɡɚɤʂɭɱɚɤɞɚʁɟɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɨɡɚɞɪɠɚɬɢɨɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɟɢɡɦɟɻɭɢʃɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ
ɡɚɜɟɫɟɨɞɦɤɚɨɲɬɨʁɟɢɞɚɬɨɭȺɉȾ-ɭɤɨʁɢʁɟɢɡɪɚɞɢɥɚCOBAɢɞɚɧɟɦɚɩɨɬɪɟɛɟ
ɡɚɫɦɚʃɢɜɚʃɟɦɨɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨɝɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɚɢɡɦɟɻɭɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɧɚɦ
ɉɪɨɛɧɨɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɩɨʂɟɨɦɨɝɭʄɢɥɨʁɟɞɨɛɢʁɚʃɟɫɜɢɯɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɢɯɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɚɪɚɫɚɫɬɚɜ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɰɢ ɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚ ɨɱɟɤɢɜɚɧɢ ɭɬɪɨɲɰɢ ɪɟɞɨɫɥɟɞ ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɪɚɞɨɜɚ ɨɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨ ɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɟ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɢɬɞ ɡɚ ɚɞɟɤɜɚɬɧɨ
ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɟɛɭɲɟʃɚɢɢʃɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚɧɚɰɟɥɨɤɭɩɧɨʁɬɪɚɫɢɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɡɚɜɟɫɟ
ɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɫɜɟɝɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɨɝɡɚɤʂɭɱɚɤʁɟɞɚʁɟɂɡɜɨɻɚɱɭɫɩɟɲɧɨɢɡɜɟɨɩɪɨɛɧɨɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɨ
ɩɨʂɟɛɪɨʁ1.
ɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯɧɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɦɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɦɩɨʂɢɦɚɭɪɚɻɟɧʁɟ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɚɬ
ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɡɚɜɟɫɟ
ɉɪɟ ɩɨɱɟɬɤɚ ɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɪɚɞɨɜɚ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɢɡɜɪɲɢɬɢ ɥɚɛɨɪɚɬɨɪɢʁɫɤɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ
ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɰɟɦɟɧɬɚɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɚɢɜɨɞɟɭɫɜɟɦɭɩɪɟɦɚɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚɢɡɐɉɋ-ɚɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ
ɰɟɦɟɧɬɛɟɧɬɨɧɢɬɢɜɨɞɚɦɨɪɚʁɭɡɚɞɨɜɨʂɢɬɢɩɨɫɟɛɧɚɫɜɨʁɫɬɜɚ
ɉɪɨɰɟʃɟɧɚɩɪɢɦɚʃɚɫɭɜɟɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɦɚɫɟɭɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚɢʃɟɤɰɢɨɧɟɡɚɜɟɫɟɢɡɧɨɫɢʄɟ
ɨɤɨɤɝɦ

Ɂɚɯɜɚɥɧɨɫɬ
ɂɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɟɱɢʁɢɫɭɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɢɭɪɚɞɭɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨʁɟɭɨɤɜɢɪɭɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɚ
ɢɡɝɪɚɞʃɟ ɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɟ ɛɪɚɧɟ ɋɟɤɥɚɮɚ ɭ ɜɢɥɚʁɢ Ʌɚɝɭɚɬ ɭ Ⱥɥɠɢɪɭ ɉɨɫɟɛɧɭ ɡɚɯɜɚɥɧɨɫɬ
ȿɧɟɪɝɨɩɪɨʁɟɤɬ-ɏɢɞɪɨɢɧɠɟʃɟɪɢɧɝɢɤɨɥɟɝɚɦɚɤɨʁɢɫɭɭɱɟɫɬɜɨɜɚɥɢɧɚɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɭɛɪɚɧɟ
276
ɅɂɌȿɊȺɌɍɊȺ
1. APD Seklafa MISSION 5 - Lot 1 - APD DU BARRAGE SEKLAFA SUR L’OUED ’M’ZI ET DE
SON TRANSFERT DEPUIS L’OUED CHERGUI (WILAYA LAGHOUAT)-MEMOIRE
TECHNIQUE - VOLUME 1 – BARRAGE DE SEKLAFA, COBA,
2. Plans guides des Dossiers d’appel d’offres, COBA
3. APD du Barrage Seklafa, MISSION Nº3 – Etude Géologique, Géotechnique et de Sismicité,
COBA
4. Levé topographique sur terrain au site du barrage de Seklafa, remis par l’Entreprise (Cosider) à
Energoprojekt-Hidroinzenjering en juin 2012,
5. Cahier élaboré par le Bureau d’études – Energoprojekt-Hidroinzenjering, dans le cadre de
l’Elaboration des plans d’exécution, notes de calculs et études complémentaires: 12041-M1-L1
Cahier 2/1 Excavations du barrage – première phase.
277
UDK 624.153.524..046
325(Ĉ(1-((.63(5,0(17$/1,+ I
REZULTATA 3525$ý81$352%,-$1-$$%
TEMELJA SAMACA
1LNROD5RPLü=RUDQ%RQLü1HERMãD'DYLGRYLü
(OHIWHULMD=ODWDQRYLü1HPDQMD0DULQNRYLü,
%UDQLPLU6WDQNRYLü
University of Niš, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture of Niš,
Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, Niš, Serbia, romicnikola@yahoo.com,
zokibon@yahoo.com, dnebojsa21@gmail.com, elefterija2006@yahoo.com,
necamarinkovic93@gmail.com, banevl82@gmail.com
REZIME
Ponašanje temelja pri SURELMDQMXMHWHPDNRMDVHXSRVWRMHüLPSURSLVLPDQDMþHãüHDQDOL]LUD
RVODQMDMXüLVHQDHNVSHULPHQWHVD$%SHþXUNDVWLPSORþDPD8RYRPUDGXELüHDQDOL]LUDQL
UH]XOWDWL GRELMHQL SURUDþXQRP QRVLYRVWL WHPHOMD QD SURELMDQMH SUHPD (XURFRGH – 2 i ACI
318R-14 i upoUHÿHQL VD UH]XOWDWLPD HNVSHULPHQWDOQLK LVSLWLYDQMD WHPHOMD VSURYHGHQLK X
realnim uslovima na nekoherentnom tlu.
./-8ý1(5(ý,HNVSHULPHQWSURELMDQMHWHPHOMVDPDF(XURFRGH– 2, ACI 318R-14
COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL TESTS WITH

CALCULATED DESIGN RESULTS OF PUNCHING
SHEAR RESISTANCE OF COLUMN FOOTINGS
ABSTRACT
Punching shear strength of the column footings in standards is usually analysed relying on
experimental tests of reinforced concrete slabs. Results of the design punching shear strength
will be analysed in this paper according to Eurocode – 2 and ACI 318-R14 and they will be
compared with results of experimental tests.
KEY WORDS: experiment, punching shear, column footing, Eurocode – 2, ACI 318R-14
UVOD
Temelji samci su þHVW oblik temelja za stubove u skeletnom sistemu. Prilikom

GLPHQ]LRQLVDQMDWHPHOMDVDPDFD]QDþDMQXXORJXima kontrola na probijanje. Propisi definišu
QDNRMLQDþLQMHQHRSKRGQRL]YUãLWLNRQWUROXWHPHOMDQDSURELMDQMH
278
Za pravilno sagledavanje ovog problema i za kvalitetno donošenje propisa u ovoj oblasti,

pored teorijskih analiza neophodno je sprovesti eksperimentalna istraživanja kako bi se
SRWYUGLOHWHRULMVNHDQDOL]HSUHWSRVWDYNHL]DNOMXþFL
Eksperimentalna istraživanja u pogledu probijanja temelja samaFD X QDXþQRM SUDNVL QLVX

þHVWD SD VH SURSLVL X ovoj oblasti QDMþHãüH RVODQMDMX QD HNVSHULPHQWDOQD LVWUDåLYDQMD $%
SORþDUDYQRPHUQRRSWHUHüHQLKLRVORQMHQLKQDVWXERYH6RE]LURPGDMHSUREOHPSURELMDQMD
WHPHOMD VOLþDQ SUREOHPX SURELMDQMD $% SORþD PRJXüH MH SULPHQLWL RGUHÿHQH ]DNRQLWRVWL L
UH]XOWDWHLVWUDåLYDQMDQD$%SORþDPDXVOXþDMXDQDOL]HSURELMDQMDWHPHOMD1RLSDN, postoje i
]QDþDMQH UD]OLNHX SRJOHGXRYLK DQDOL]D DQDMRþLJOHGQLMD MH WR ãWR VX WHPHOML X GLUHNWQRP
kontaktu sa tlom i prilikom analize SURELMDQMD WHPHOMD QHRSKRGQR MH L]PHÿX RVWDORJ
sagledati interakciju temelja i tla.
Table 1. Overview of previous experiments on column footings

Tabela 1. Pregled prethodnih eksperimentalnih ispitivanja na temeljima samcima
Broj Geometrija temelja
Autor Godina 1DþLQoslanjanja ispitanih Dimenzije 6WDWLþND
temelja Oblik
[mm] visina [mm]
Simões sa saradnicima 2016 Podloga 8 Kvadrat 1950 do 2120 497 do 516
Kumer Shill i Hoque 2015 Stabilizovano tlo 1 Kvadrat 1524 212
Siburg i Hegger 2014 Podloga 13 Kvadrat 1200 do 2700 400 do 590
Urban sa saradnicima 2013 Linijski oslonac 9 Oktagonalni 1948 do 2344 118 do 318
2005- Pesak u
Hegger sa saradnicima 22 Kvadrat 900 do 1800 150 do 470
2009 sanduku/Podloga
Timm 2003 Linijski oslonac 10 Kvadrat 760 do 1080 172 do 246
Linijski Kvadratni i
Hallgren sa saradnicima 1998 14 850 do 960 273 do 278
oslonac/Podloga kružni
Dieterle i Rostasy 1987 Podloga 13 Kvadrat 1500 do 3000 320 do 800
Kordina i Nölting 1981 Podloga 11 Pravougaoni 1500 do 1800 193 do 343
Dieterle i Steinle 1981 Podloga 6 Kvadratni 1800 do 3000 700 do 740
Podloga/glina i
Rivkin 1967 3/6 Kvadrat 650 i 1000 95
pesak
Kvadratni i
Richart 1948 Opruga 149 610 do 3000 200 do 740
kružni
20 (pri
Talbot 1913 Opruga Kvadratni 1520 250
probijanju)
U VSURYHGHQLP HNVSHULPHQWDOQLP LVWUDåLYDQMLPD WHPHOMD SUL SURELMDQMX WOR VH QDMþHãüH

aproksimira sistemom opruga ili linijskim osloncem koji fiktivno simuliraju reakcije koje se
XWOXMDYOMDMXSULSUHQRãHQMXRSWHUHüHQMDVDWHPHOMDQDWORSamo je mali broj eksperimentalnih
istraživanja sproveden u realnim uslovima sa temeljima oslonjenim na tlo. Ova istraživanja
sproveli su Hegger sa saradnicima – sa peskom u metallnom sanduku (Hegger J, 2006),
Rivkin – na pesku i glini in situ (Ɋɢɜɤɢɧ, 1967), Kumer Shill na stabilizovanom tlu Tabela 1
(Z. %RQLü 2017).
279
EKSPERIMENTALNO ISPITIVANJE
Za potrebe eksperimentalnog istraživanja in situ pripremljeni su uzorci (temelji samci) kao

i podtlo. U iskopanu jamu dimenzija 4 x 5 m i dubine 3m je najpre postavljen prethodno
SULSUHPOMHQþHOLþQLUDP5DPMHVDNRQWUDWHUHWQRPJUHGRPXWRNX eksperimenta služio kao
RSRUDFKLGUDXOLþQRMSUHVLSUHNRNRMHMH]DGDYDQRRSWHUHüHQMHQDWHPHOM,VNRSDQL]HPOMDQL
PDWHULMDO MH GHSRQRYDQ D X MDPX MH X VORMHYLPD QDVLSDQ UHþQL DJUHJDW VD NDOLEULVDQLP
granulometrijskim sastavom u slojevima od po 30cm. Nakon nasipanja svakog od slojeva
DJUHJDWD X MDPX YUãHQR MH ]ELMDQMH YLEURSORþRP L PHUHQ MH PRGXO VWLãOMLYRVWL VWDWLþNRP
NUXåQRPSORþRPLGLQDPLþNRPNUXåQRPSORþRP„VNRþNRP“). Srednje vrednosti modula
VWLãOMLYRVWLXJUDÿHQLKVORMHYDVXLPDOHYUHGQRVWLRG GR03D7DNRÿH, pre svakog
ispitivanja temelja vršeno je merenje modula stišljivosti poslednjeg sloja podtla. Srednje
vrednosti modula stišljivosti za poslednji sloj su bile od 37.5 do 76.7 MPa (Tabela 2), i one
RGJRYDUDMXXRELþDMHQRM]ELMHQRVWLSRGWla.
Dimenzije temelja su kod svih uzoraka 85/85 cm dok je visina temelja, keoficijent armiranja
zategnute zone i karakteristike betona i armature bile UD]OLþLWDNRGUD]OLþLWLKVHULMDX]RUDND
(Tabela 2). Prilikom VSURYRÿHQMDeksperimenta ni kod jednog ispitanog temelja QLMHSULPHüHQ
ORPXWOXYHüMHXYHNGROD]LORGRORPDXWHPHOMXSURELMDQMHP
Slika. 1. Šema postavke poligona za ispitivanje Slika. 2. Postavka eksperimenta

Fig. 1. Scheme of the experimental setup Fig. 2. Experimental setup
Eksperimentalna istraživanja su izvedena tako što su uzorci temelja (prefabrikovani temelji

VDPFL SRVWDYOMDQL QD SUHWKRGQR SULSUHPOMHQR SRGWOR RSWHUHüHQL YHUWLNDOQRP FHQWULþQRP
VLORPNRMDMHDSOLFLUDQDKLGUDXOLþNRPGL]DOLFRPNRMDMHSRVWDYOMHQDL]PHÿXVWXEDWHPHOMDL
kontrateretne grede, Slike 1 i 2.
2SWHUHüHQMH MH ]DGDYDQR X VWXSQMHYLPD RG N1 6YDNL VWXSDQM RSWHUHüHQMD MH RGUåDYDQ
konstantnim do završetka konsolidacije podtla. Konsolidacija podtla je registrovana
SUDüHQMHPYHUWLNDOQLKSRPHUDQMDXLYLþQLPWDþNDPDWHPHOMDLQHSRVUHGQRLVSRGVWXED8WRNX
HNVSHULPHQWDVYDNHVHNXQGHVXSUDüHQLVOHGHüLSDUDPHWULGLODWDFLMHXDUPDWXULGLODWDFLMHX
betonu, vHUWLNDOQDSRPHUDQMDXLYLþQLPWDþNDPDWHPHOMDLQHSRVUHGQRLVSRGVWXEDLQWHQ]LWHW
]DGDWHVLOHXWRNXRSWHUHüLYDQMDLYUHGQRVWNRQWDNWQLKSULWLVDNDXSRGWOX (Vacev T, 2015).
280
Tabela 2. Rezultati eksperimentalnih ispitivanja temelja

Table 2. Achieved characteristics of test foundations
ýYUVWRüD ýYUVWRüD
Visina betona Koeficijent na Modul Izmerena
6WDWLþND 3UHþQLN
Naziv temeljne pri armiranja kidanje stišljivosti sila pri
visina armature
temelja SORþH pritisku ȡt armature tla M S probijanju
d [mm] [mm]
h [mm] f cm [%] f ym [MPa] [kN]
[MPa] [MPa]
1001/
F1 200 175 30.37 8 0.40 570 54.0/61.2 906*
F2 150 125 30.37 8 0.40 570 76.7 1050
F3 125 100 16.83 8 0.40 570 48.0 430
F4 175 150 16.83 8 0.40 570 39.5 656
F5 150 125 15.28 8 0.40 570 46.0 451
F6 150 125 7.92 8 0.40 570 37.5 440
F7 150 125 15.83 8.5 0.27 477 60.2 527
F8 150 125 15.83 8.5 0.48 477 66.5 645
F9 150 125 15.83 8.5 0.91 477 57.0 720
* 7RNRPLVSLWLYDQMDXSUYRPQDYUDWXGHVLRVHORPXVWXEXSULRSWHUHüHQMXRGN11DNRQãWRMH
napravljen novi stub pri ponovnom ispitivanju došlo je do probijanja u temelju pri sili od 906 kN.
325(Ĉ(1-(5(=8/7$7$(.3(5,0(17$/1,+,675$ä,9$1-$6$
3525$ý8NOM PREMA PROPISIMA EUROCODE-2 i ACI 318-R14
Eurocode-2
Prema Eurocode-2 kontrolu na probijanje je potrebno sprovesti po obodu stuba i unutar

osnovnog kontrolnog obima na rastojanju ܽா஼ଶ = 2.0݀ od ivice stuba. Nosivost na probijanje
betona ‫ݒ‬ோௗ prema Eurocode – 2 na rastojanju ܽா஼ଶ < 2.0݀ od ivice stuba VHRGUHÿXMHSUHPD
izrazu (EN 1992-1-1 Eurocode 2, 2004):
ଵ 2݀ 2݀
‫ݒ‬ோௗ = ‫ܥ‬ோௗ,௖ ‫( ڄ ݇ ڄ‬100 ‫ߩ ڄ‬௟ ‫݂ ڄ‬௖௞ )ଷ ൒ ‫ݒ‬௠௜௡ (1)
ܽா஼ଶ ܽா஼ଶ
ܽா஼ଶ – UDVWRMDQMHRGLYLFHRSWHUHüHQHSRYUãLQHGRSRVPDWUDQRJNRQWUROQRJRELPD
‫ܥ‬ோௗ,௖ = 0.18/ߛ஼ – empirijski faktor gde je Ȗ C korekcioni faktor za material (beton);
ଶ଴଴
݇ =1+ට ൑ 2.0 – IDNWRUYHOLþLQHVWDWLþNHYLVLQH
ௗ
݂௖௞ – NDUDNWHULVWLþQDþYUVWRüDEHWRQa (na cilindru);
ߩ௟ – koeficijent armiranja (armature za savinje);
281
v min 0.035 k 3 / 2 f ck
1/ 2
– minimalna nostivost na probijanje;
d – VWDWLþNDYLVLQDSUHVHND
Sila koja izaziva probijanje u temelju prema Eurocode – 2 ܸாௗ,௥௘ௗ VHRGUHÿXMHNDR
ܸாௗ,௥௘ௗ = ܸாௗ െ ‫ܣ‬଴ ‫ߪ ڄ‬௡ (2)
ܸாௗ – RSWHUHüHQMHVWXEDߪ௡ – efektivni (neto reaktivni) pritisci u tlu; ‫ܣ‬଴ – površina unutar
posmatranog kontrolnog obima.
Na osnovu toga sila u stubu ܸாௗ je:
‫ܣ‬ ܸாௗ,௥௘ௗ
ܸாௗ = ܸாௗ,௥௘ௗ =
‫ ܣ‬െ ‫ܣ‬଴ 1 െ ‫ܣ‬଴ (3)
‫ܣ‬
gde je A površina baze temelja.
.RQDþQRVHnosivost QDSURELMDQMHRGUHÿXMHprema:
ܸோௗ = ‫ݒ‬ோௗ ‫ݑ ڄ‬௖௥ ‫ ݀ ڄ‬൒ ܸாௗ,௥௘ௗ (4)
Gde je ‫ݑ‬௖௥ – kontrolni (NULWLþQL) RELPQDNULWLþQRPUDVWRMDQMXa cr .
Slika 3. 3R]LFLMHRVQRYQRJLNULWLþQRJNRQWUROQRJRELPDSUHPD(XURFRGH- 2
Fig.3. Position of the basic and critical control perimeter according to Eurocode - 2
282
ACI 318-R14
U standardu ACI 318- R14 nosivost temelja na probijanje MHGHILQLVDQDSUHPDMHGQDþLQL5):
‫ۓ‬ 4ߣඥ݂௖ᇱ
ۖ 4
൬2 + ൰ ߣඥ݂௖ᇱ
߶ܸ௖ = min ߚ (5)
‫۔‬
ߙ
ۖ൬2 + ௦ ݀ ൰ ߣඥ݂ ᇱ
௖
‫ە‬ ܾ଴
ܸ௖ - nominalna nosivost na smicanje betona [lb]; ݂௖ᇱ - VSHFLILþQDþYUVWRüDEHWRQDSULSULWLVNX

[psi]; ߣ – PRGLILNDFLRQL IDNWRU NRMLP VH X]LPD X RE]LU XWLFDM UHGXNRYDQLK PHKDQLþNLK
NDUDNWHULVWLNDODNRDJUHJDWQLKEHWRQDXRGQRVXQDVWDQGDUGQHEHWRQDVDLVWLPþYUVWRüDPDSUL
pritisku; ߚ - RGQRV GXåH SUHPD NUDüRM strani temelja; ߙ௦ – konstanta koja se koristi pri
SURUDþXQXܸ௖ XSORþDPDLWHPHOMLPDܾ଴ – RELPNULWLþQRJSUHVHNDpri probijanju kod SORþa i
temelja samca; ݀ – VWDWLþNDYLVLQD (ACI 318-14, 2014).
6OLND3R]LFLMDNULWLþQRJSUHVHNDSUHPD$&,318 - R 14
Fig. 4. Positiion of the critical section accordint to ACI 318 - R 14
283
Tabela 3. ߣ – modifikacioni faktor prema ACI 318 – R14

Table 3. ߣ – modification factor according to ACI 318 – R14
Beton Sastav agregata ࣅ
Fino: ASTM C330
Svi lakoagregatni 0.75
Grubo: ASTM C330
Fino: KombinacijaASTM
Lakoagregatni,
C330 i C33 0.75 to 0.85
fino mleveni
Grubo: ASTM C330
Pesak - Fino: ASTM C33
0.85
lagoagregatni Grubo: ASTM C330
Pesak Fino: ASTM C33
lakoagregatni Grubo: Kombinacija ASTM 0.85 to 1
grubo mleveni C330 i C33
Fino: ASTM C33
.ODVLþDQEHWRQ 1
Grubo: ASTM C33
Vrednosti ߙ௦ VX]DXQXWUDãQMHVWXERYH]DLYLþQHVWXERYHL]DVWXERYHXXJORYLPD
Na slici 5 uporedno su prikazani rezultati nosivosti na probijanje dobijeni eksperimentalnim

LVSLWLYDQMLPDLVUDþXQDWLSUHPD(XURFRGH– 2 i ACI 318 – R14 za temelje sa karakteristikama
datim u Tabeli 2.
6OLND*UDILþNLSULND]GRELMHQLKYUHGQRVWLQRVLYRVWLQDSURELMDQMHWHPHOMD
Fig. 5. Overview of the obtained results of the punching shear resistance of footings
=$./-8ý$.
Na osnovu prikazane DQDOL]HPRåHVHXRþLWLGDSURUDþXQSURELMDQMDSUHPDSURSLVLPD$&,

318 – R14 daje konzervativne rezultate u odnosu na rezultate dobijene prema Eurocode- 2,
ãWR SRWYUÿXMX L UH]XOWDWL HNVSHULPHQWDOQLK LVWUDåLYDQMD 3URUDþXQVND VLOD SURELMDQMD prema
ACE 318 – R14 MH ]QDþDMQR PDQMD QHJR sila probijanja koja je dostignuta u ispitanim
temeljima.
284
2YRMHLRþHNLYDQRVRE]LURPGDVHSULOLNRPSURUDþXQDSURELMDQMDWHPHOMDQHX]LPDXRE]LU
armatura koja postoji u zategntoj zoni YHüVHQRVLYRVWQDSURELMDQMHWHPHOMD, prema ovom
standardu, zasnivDVDPRQDQRVLYRVWLEHWRQDQDVPLFDQMH2YRMHMDVQRXRþOMLYRXLVSLWDQLP
uzorcima F7, F8 i F9 koji imaju u potponosti iste karakteristike, osim što se procenat
armiranja u zategnutoj zoni SRYHüDYD RG ) GR ) 3ULOLNRP SURUDþXQD QRVLYRVWL QD
probijanje prema ACI 318 – 5RYRSRYHüDQMHNRHILFLMHQWDDUPLUDQMDQHPDQLNDNDYXWLFDM
SURUDþXQVND VLOD SURELMDQMD MH LVWD i izbosi149kN) dok je eksperimentalnim ispitivanjem
pokazano da se sa SRYHüDQMHPNRHILFLMHQWDDUPLUDQMDu zategnutoj zoni SRYHüDYDLQRVLYRVW
temelja na probijanje.
Prema propisima ACI 318 – R14 uticaj armature se uzima u obzir samo ako je ona posebno
SUHGYLÿHQD]DSULKYDWDQMHLVNOMXþLYRXWLFDMDSURELMDQMDSRSXWX]HQJLMDLOLþHSRYDVDJODYRP
3URUDþXQSUHPDEurocode – 2 uzima u obzir armaturu koja se nalazi u zategnutoj zoni, te su

UH]XOWDWL SURUDþXQD QRVLYRVWL QD SURELMDQMH WHPHOMD, prema ovom standardu, približniji
realnim vrednostima koje su dobijene eksperimentalnim ispitivanjima. Prema tome, se može
zaklMXþLWLGD(XURFRGH– 2 preciznije sagledava problem probijanja temelja u odnosu na ACI
318 – R14.
Zahvalnica
2YDMUDGMHUH]XOWDWLVWUDåLYDQMDQDQDXþQRLVWUDåLYDþNRPSURMHNWX75NRMLILQDQVLUD
Ministarstvo prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja Republike Srbije.
LITERATURA:
EN 1992-1-1 Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1.1: General Rules and Rules for
Buildings, Brussels, 2004, 225 pp.
Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14); Commentary on Building Code
Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318R-14)
=RUDQ%RQLü1HERMãD'DYLGRYLü7RGRU9DFHY1LNROD5RPLü(OHIWHULMD=ODWDQRYLü-HOHQD
6DYLü3XQFKLQJEHKDYLRXURIUHLQIRUFHGFRQFUHWHIRRWLQJVDWWHVWLQJDQGDFFRUGLQJWR
Eurocode 2 and fib Model Code 2010, International Journal of Concrete Structures and
Materials, DOI 10.1007/s40069-017-0213-8, ISSN 1976-0485 / eISSN 2234-1315(Online),
Volume 11, Issue 4, December 2017., pp.657-676,
Hegger J, Sherif A. G, Ricker M. (2006). Experimental Investigations on Punching Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Footings, ACI Structural Journal 604-613.
Hegger J, Ricker M, Sherif A.G. (2009). Punching Strength of Reinforced Concrete Footings, ACI
Structural Journal 706-716.
ɊɢɜɤɢɧɋȺɊɚɫɱɟɬɮɭɧɞɚɦɟɧɬɨɜɂɡɞɚɬɟɥɶɫɬɜɨȻɭɞɿɜɟɥɶɧɢɤɄɢɟɜLQ5XVVLDQ
Vacev T, Bonic Z, Prolovic V, Davidovic N, Lukic D. (2015). Testing and finite element analysis of
reinforced concrete column footings failing by punching shear, Engineering Structures,
Elsevier, 92, 1-14.
http://www.ce-ref.com/Foundation/Spread_footing/Depth_footing/Footing_depth.html
285
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.537(497.11)
624.137
STABILIZACIJA KLIZIŠTA U ZONI USEKA BR.

3 2'67$&,21$ä(ɄɆ'2ɄɆ
876+ 825.00 L=500.0m LOT1 AUTOPUT ȿ-75
-DQNR5DGRYDQRYLü*, Miloš Lazoviü**,
0DULMD/D]RYLü RadovanoYLü**, 1HYHQD3HWNRYLü*
* Privredno društvo ''Beoexpert Design'' d.o.o., Ruzvaltova 23, Beograd,
office@beoexpertdesign.com
*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWX%HRJUDGX%XOHYDU.UDOMD$OHNVDQGUD
Beograd, mmmlazovic@gmail.com, mlazovic@grf.bg.ac.rs
REZIME
U ovom radu razmatra se teren kao sredina u kojoj je došlo do klizanja i koji je potrebno
sanirati, kako bi se dobio prostor koji je stabilan za eksploataciju autoputa. Zadatak sanacije
je da izabere meUXNRMDüHGDWLSRWSXQXVWDELOQRVWVDQDFLRQRPWHUHQXLSXWX. Usled veoma
složenih geoloških uslova na delu trase autoputa E-75 LOT-1 od km 876+325.00 do km
876+825.00 prilikom L]YRÿHQMDUDGRYDQDLVNRSXLL]UDGL]DãWLWQHNRQVWUXNFLMHGRãORMHGR
aktivacije umirenog klizišta koje zahvata i trasu autoputa. U cilju sanacije izradjen je projekat
za sanaciju klizišta.
./-8ý1(5(ý,sanacija, klizište, kosina, autoput
LANDSLIDE STABILIZATION IN THE ZONE OF

CUT3 FROM ɄɆ72ɄɆ
L=500.0m LOT1 HIGHWAY ȿ-75
ABSTRACT
In this paper, a terrain as an environment in which there has been slipping in and that needs
to be repaired to give a space that is stable for the exploitation of the highway. The task of
rehabilitation is to choose a measure that will provide complete stability and road
rehabilitation field. Due to the very complex geological conditions at the part of the alignment
of the E-75 of LOT-1 876 + 325.00 km to 876 km + 825.00 during execution of the excavation
and preparation of protective structure there has been calmed down the activation procedure,
and which slides motorway route. In order to repair drafted a project for the rehabilitation of
landslides.
KEY WORDS: rehabilitation, landslides, slopes, highway

286
UVOD
Na delu trase autoputa E-75, LOT-1, od km 876+325.00 do km 876+825.00 (stacionaža

prema autoputu) analizom izvršenih geodetskih i inklinometarskih merenja u periodu avgust
- QRYHPEDU XWYUÿHQR MH GD VH QDSUHGPHWQRMGHRQLFL nalazi duboko klizište koje se
prostire od reke Južne Morave i zahvata veliki deo terena iza izvedene zaštitne konstrukcije.
3UHPD/,'$5VQLPFLPD]RQHXNRMRMVHQDOD]LQHVWDELOQLWHUHQPRJXüHGLPHQ]LMHNOL]LãWDVX
oko BxL=250x400 m sa višestrukim ravnima klizanja koje su se dogodile u ranijim epohama
LVWRULMH 'XELQD NOL]DQMD XWYUÿHQD MH QD RVQRYX SRVWRMHüLK LQNOLQRPHWDUD X ]RQL L]YHGHQH
potporne konstrukcije i iznosi oko 16.0 m ispod kote kolovoza odnosno oko 45.0 m ispod
površine terena na udaljenosti od 40.0 PL]DSRVWRMHüH]DãWLWQHNRQVWUXNFLMH
1DNRQ NRQDþQRJ ]DNOMXþND GD MH QD SUHGPHWQRM GHRQLFL GRãOR GR SRQRYQH DNWLYDFLMH
umirenog klizišta koje zahvata i trasu autoputa, izvedeni su GRGDWQL JHRWHKQLþNL LVWUDåQL
radovi. Paralelno sa istražnim radovima]ERJEU]LQHL]YRÿHQMDUDGRYDLSXãWDQMDXVDREUDüDM
QRYRJGHODDXWRSXWDL]UDÿen je projekat za stabilizaciju klizišta. Sanacione mere obavljene
su u tri faze. Na slici 1. Prikazano je klizište u zoni useka br. 3.
Slika 1. Klizište u zoni useka br. 3

Figure 1. The sliding zone of the cutting no. 3
287
FAZA I
8RNYLUXSUYHID]HUDGRYD]DVWDELOL]DFLMXNRVLQH&87/27SUHGYLÿHQLVXUDGRYLQDLVNRSX
WHUHQDL]DSRVWRMHüHNRnstrukcije od mikrošipova i radove na izradi površinske drenaže. Pre
SRþHWNDUDGRYDbilo je potrebno LVNUþLWLVYXãXPXLSRVHüLUDVWLQMH]DWLPIRUPLUDWLSULVWXSQH
i gradilišne puteve za komunikaciju i transport materijala. Svi radovi su izvedeni mašinskim
putem sa utovarom i transportom na deponiju prema uputstvima nadzornog organa i
investitora. Iskop za stabilizaciju vršen je odozgo na dole skidanjem materijala sa
QDMXGDOMHQLMH WDþNH SRYODþHQMHP ND SRVWRMHüRM NRQVWUXNFLML RG PLNURšipova. Radovi su
izvodjeni po nivoima sa ostavljanjem stalnih platoa i kosLQD RGJRYDUDMXüLK GLPHQ]LMD
odnosno nagiba u skladu sa projektnom dokumentacijom. Prilikom iskopa formirani su
privremeni obodni kanali dubine od oko 1.0 m u kojima se formira pad ka obodnim kanalima
sa leve i desne strane kosine, koji kao kolektori prikupljaju vodu i evakuišu je do reke.
Kolektorski kanali prokopani su QDPHVWLPDSRVWRMHüLKMDUXJDWDNRGDLPDMXYLVLQVNLSDGRG
YUKDNDUHFL1DNRQLVNRSDGRRGJRYDUDMXüLK nivoa, pristupilo se izradi drenažnih rovova.
Drenažni rovovi izvedeni su u skladu sa projektnom dokumentacijom po kosinama i ispod

trajnih platform. U dužini iskop se vršio u kampadama po 20 m. Nakon završetka iskopa,
postavljenji su geotekstili po stranama rova. Za sve visine iskopa preko 2.0 m postavljena je
podgrada. Geotekstil je postavljen sa preklopom u dužini od 1.0 m. Pošto je završeno
postavljanje geotekstila, postavljene su perforirane PVC cevi. Na kraju, rov se zatrpava sa
GUHQDåQLPPDWHULMDORPXVNODGXVDJUDILþNLPSULOR]LPD6YLUDGRYLQDLVNRSXVXL]YRÿeni što
je bržHPRJXüHjer se radna snaga ne sme dugo zadržavati u otkopanim rovovima. Stabilnost
terena sa iskopom i oborenim nivoom podzemne vode proveren je i graficki u programu
Slide, kao sto je to prikazano na slici 2.
Slika 2. Stanje terena sa iskopom i oborenim nivoom vode

Figure 2. The state of the field of excavation and low water level
288
Izmerena pomeranja u periodu od novembra 2018. do februara 2019. godine iznose manje od
10 mm. Na osnovu toga PRåHVH]DNOMXþLWLGDVXSUHWKRGQRprojektovane i izvedene mere
stabilizacije u okviru faze I pozitivne.
FAZA II
8 RNYLUX GUXJH ID]H UDGRYD ]D VWDELOL]DFLMX NRVLQH &87 /27 SUHGYLÿHQL VX UDGRYL QD
stabilizaciji nožice klizišta u zoni leve obale reke Južna Morava, na dužini od 300.50 m, od
km 3+592 do km 3+896,05 (po osi reke), odnosno od km 876+739,23 do km 876+485 (po
osi auto puta). Ovi radovi su se sastojali od izrade nasipa od armiranog tla, visine do 12.5 m
u zoni nožice klizišta (Slika 3.). Nasip je kao balast doprineo VWDELOL]DFLMLNRVLQHDWDNRÿHje
izradom nasipa izvršena preraspodela masa posle iskopa potrebnog za devijaciju puta. Kako
MHUHNDXQHSRVUHGQRMEOL]LQLSUHGYLÿHQRJQDVLSDNDRPHUDSREROMãDQMDVODERQRVLYRJSRGWOD
nasip je fundLUDQQDNRQVWUXNFLMLRGãLSRYDSUHNRNRMHüHVHL]YHVWLNDPHQL QDEDþDMXEHWRQX
u visini od 5.P1DRYDMQDþLQGRELODVHVWDELOQDED]DSUHNRNRMHMHL]YHGHQ nasip visine
10.5-12.5 m, do kote nivelete puta.
Analiza stabilnosti kosine i zaštitne konstrukcije je izvršena po fazama izvoÿenja radova.
Faze su modelovane prema tehnologiji izvoÿenja radova. U cilju analize stabilnosti izvršena
VX GRGDWQD JHRWHKQLþND LVWUDåLYDQMD 1D RVQRYX UH]XOWDWD WLK LVWUDåLYDQMD QDSUDYOMHQ MH
JHRWHKQLþNLSURILOQDkm 876 + 625.0. Nivo klizne ravni, podzemna voda i slojevi tla, uneti
VX X SURUDþXQ WDþQR RQDNR NDNR VX L]PHUHQL X LVWUDåLYDQMLPD %XGXüL GD QLMH ELOR
ODERUDWRULMVNLK WHVWLUDQMD X GRGDWQLP JHRWHKQLþNLP LVWUDåLYDQMLPD SDUDPHWUL WOD NRML VX
NRULãüHQL ]D SURUDþXQ VX X]HWL L] RULJLQDOQRJ JHRWHKQLþNRJ HODERUDWD L] JODYQRJ SURMHNWD
autoputa [1]5H]LGXDOQLSDUDPHWULþYUVWRüH]DNOL]QXUDYDQGRELMHQLVXSRYUDWQRPDQDOL]RP
za faktor sigurnosti F S = 1.0 u fazi iskopa za autoput, što je u skladu sa fazom kada je klizanje
SRþHORDobijene vrednosti parametara za kliznu ravan i druge slojeve tla predstavljene su u
Tabeli 1.
Tabela 1. 3DUDPHWULJHRORãNLKVORMHYDNRMLVXNRULãüHQLXSURUDþXQX
Table 1. Parameters of the geological layers, which were used in the calculation
Materijal Ȗ>N1P@ ĳ>@ c[kPa]
S* 19 27 15
S** 24 27 25
S*** 16 40 100
Ka 22 17 0
$QDOL]D LQWHUQH VWDELOQRVWL L]YUãHQD MH X FLOMX GHILQLVDQMD NDUDNWHULVWLþQH JHRPHWULMH L

rasporeda geomreža. Ova analiza izvršena je u skladu sa Preporukama za projektovanje i
analizu konstrukcija od armirane zemlje - EBGEO [2] i DIN 1054 (1976) [3@.RULãüHQ je
softver GGU Stability [4]. =D REH]EHÿHQMH GRYROMQH VWDELOQRVWL ]DKWHYDQ MH VWHSHQ
LVNRULãüHQMD K .DR VHL]PLþNR RSWHUHüHQMH X]HWR MH horizontalno ubrzanje k h = 0.15.
$QDOL]DJOREDOQHVWDELOQRVWLQDVLSDL]DãWLWQHNRQVWUXNFLMHMHL]YUãHQDSRID]DPDL]YRÿHQMD
radova. )D]HVXPRGHOLUDQHSUHPDWHKQRORJLMLL]YRÿHQMDUDGRYD3URUDþXQMHL]YUãHQX0.(
programu Plaxis 2D [5]2YDMSURUDþXQVH]DVQLYDQDPHWRGLNRQDþQLKHOHPHQDWDSULPHQRP
inkrementalno iterativnog postupka. Kako je ova konstrukcija linijska, opravdano je
289
DQDOL]LUDWLMHXSRSUHþQRPSUHVHNXXXVORYLPDUDYQRJVWDQMDGHIRUPDFLMD)DNWRUVWDELOQRVWL
u programu Plaxis 2D dobijen je prema postupku koja se zove Phi-C redukcija, koja je
XVYRMHQDNDRYHRPDGREUD]DRYXYUVWXSURUDþXQD=DSRWUHEHRYRJSURMHNWDPRGHOLUDQMH
MHGDQJODYQLSRSUHþQLSURILOXSURJUDPX3OD[LV'3URILOQDNPMHXVYRMHQNDR
merodavni. Vrednosti faktora sigurnolsti na klizanje GRELMHQH X SURUDþXQLPD SULPHQRP
programa Plaxis 2D su predstavljene u tabeli 2.
Tabela 2. )DNWRULVLJXUQRVWLGRELMHQLSURUDþXQRP
Table 2. Factors of safety obtained by calculation
Faza Fs
Prirodno stanje 1.54
Iskop za zaštitnu konstrukciju 1.55
=DãWLWQDNRQVWUXNFLMDRGãLSRYDLNDPHQLQDEDþDMXEHWRQX 2.19
=DãWLWQDNRQVWUXNFLMDRGãLSRYDLNDPHQLQDEDþDMXEHWRQXLLVNRS]DQDVLS 2.31
Zaštitna konstrukcija i nasip 1.25
1DRVQRYXSULND]DQLKIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLQDNOL]DQMHPRåHVH]DNOMXþLWLGDSUHGORåHQHL
analizirane mere sa zaštitnom konstrukcijom i nasipom su ]DGRYROMDYDMXüH.
Slika 3. Presek faze II

Figure 3. The intersection of phase II
FAZA III
U okviru trHüH ID]H UDGRYD ]D VWDELOL]DFLMX NRVLQH &87 /27 SUHGYLÿHQL VX UDGRYL QD
VWDELOL]DFLMLSRVWRMHüHSRWSRUQHNRQVWUXNFLMHVDGHVQHVWUDQHGHVQRJSROXSURILODna dužini od
300.50 m, od km 3+592 do km 3+896.05 (po osi reke), odnosno od km 876+525 do km
876+725 (po osi auto puta). Ovi radovi se sastoje, kao što je prikazano na slici 4., od izrade
GRGDWQLKVLGDUD]DSUHGQDSUH]DQMH$%JUHGDNRMHVHSRVWDYOMDMXNDRXNUXüHQMDQDNRVLQX
290
EHUPHLVSRGSRVWRMHüHNRQVWUXNFLMH JDELRQVNRJ]LGDQDSODWIRUPLL]QDGEHUPHLGodatnih
drenažnih bušotina. Prethodno napregnuta sidra projektovana su sa ukupnom dužinom od
55.0 m. Slobodna dužina iznosi 40.0 m, a dužina sidrenja je 15.0 m. Sidra se sastoje od 9
kablova Ø15.2 mm. Sila prednaprezanja za jedno sidro iznosi 9x9=81t=810 kN. Sidra ove
GXåLQH L QRVLYRVWL SUHGYLÿHQD VX NDNR EL SRYHüDOD JOREDOQX VWDELOQRVW þLWDYRJ WHUHQD L
SRVWRMHüHSRWSRUQHNRQVWUXNFLMH. Raspored sidara je 6.0x2.0 m. Na svakih 6.0 PSUHGYLÿHQD
je jedna betonska greda u koju se sidre 3 sidra. Pored navedenog uNUXüHQMDQDKRUL]RQWDOQRM
platformi ispred zavese od mikro šipova postavljen je gabionski zid sa 15m3/m gabiona.
1MHJRYDXORJDMHGDSRGXSUHSRVWRMHüL]LGNRMLMHXVOHGNOL]DQMDL]DãDRL]YHUWLNDOQHRVHL
nagnuo se ka kolovoznoj platformi
1D NUDMX ]ERJ þinjenice da je zona useka koji se sanira bila puna vode, izgradjeni su
horizontalni drenovi sa dužinom od 55.0 m. Uloga drenova nije samo da drenira konstrukciju,
YHüLVLGULãQX]RQXXQXWDUWHUHQD
Dimenzionisanje AB greda izvršeno je za uticaje koji se u njima javljaju u trenutku loma.
*UHGHVXGLPHQ]LRQLVDQHWDNRGDLPDMXYHüXQRVLYRVWQHJRãWRLPDju prethodno napregnuta
sidra. Na osnovu prikazanih faktora sigurnosti na klizanje koji su dobijeni X SURUDþXQLPD
izvršenim programom Plaxis 2D, a prikazani u tabeli 3., PRåHVH]DNOMXþLWLGDVXSUHGORåHQH
i analizirane mere sa dodatnim gredama, GXJDþNLPVLGULPDLJDELRQLma ]DGRYROMDYDMXüH Na
slici br. 5 prikazana je kosina br. 3 nakon izvedene sanacije klizišta.
Tabela 3. Faktori sigurnosti GRELMHQLSURUDþXQRP

Table 3. Factors of safety obtained by calculation
Faza Fs
Prirodno stanje 0.9882
Iskop za kolovoz 1.0781
6WDELOL]DFLMDSRVWRMHüHNRQVWUXNFLMH 1.3624
Slika 4. Presek faze III

Figure 4. The intersection of phase III
291
Slika 5. Kosina br. 3 nakon sanacije

Figure 5. The slope of no. 3 after rehabilitation
=$./-8ý$.
Konstrukcija kosine na kojoj se odvijao proces klizanja izgradjen je od hlorit-muskovitskog

ãNULOMFD NRML MH IL]LþNR-hemijski izmenjen, tj. degradiran. Ovi oVXOLQVNL WHUHQL VX þHVWL QD
QDãLP SURVWRULPD 8 WH WHUHQH VSDGD *UGHOLþND NOLVXUD 2VXOLQVNL WHUHQL QDVWDMX HUR]LMRP
þYUVWHVWHQHNRMDVHQDOD]LX]DOHÿu. To su kvartarne tvorevine.
Cilj projektanta bio je da ovako hemijski izmenjen i degradiran teren bude stabilan pod
WHUHWRP JUDÿevinskog objekta fundiranog u njemu. Osnovni zadatak sanacije je pravilno
izabrana mera NRMDüHGDWLSRWSXQXVWDELOQRVWVDQDFLRQRPWHUHQXLREMHNWXDGDWHUHQLREMHNDW
posle sanacije budu funkcionalni. Izabrana sanaciona mera mora biti u finansijskom smislu
povoljna i da se sa njom postiže racionalnost sanacije.
U gradjevinskoj praksi, poznata su stabilizaciona rešenja terena i objekata primenom

sanacionih mera kao što su preraspodela masa tla ili stena, zamena nedovoljno nosivog tla
kvalitetnijim, izrada potpornih konstrukcija, koje služe da prime pritiske pokrenute mase tla,
drenaže za dreniranje podzemnih voda, sistemi otvorenih kanala za prihvat površinskih voda
i kontroliVDQRRGYRÿHQMHYDQWHODNOL]LãWDPHUHzaštite od erozije obala vodnih tokova, zaštita
terena od erozije vegetativnim sredstvima, itd [6]. Ove mere uspešno su sprovedene i za
sanaciju klizišta na trasi autoputa E-75 LOT-1 od km 876+325.00 do km 876+825.00. Na
osnovu dobijenih rezultata faktora VLJXUQRVWLQDNOL]DQMHPRåHVH]DNOMXþLWLGDSUHGORåHQHL
DQDOL]LUDQHPHUH]DGRYROMDYDMXüH
292
LITERATURA:
[1] Geosonda konsolidacija d.o.o.: ,]YHãWDMRGRGDWQLPJHRWHKQLþNLPi JHRIL]LþNLP

istražnim radovima na lokaciji Lot 1, kosina br. 3, autoput E-75, mart 2018.
[2] German Geotechnical Society: Recommendations for Design and Analysis of Earth
Structures using Geosynthetic Reinforcements – EBGEO, Second Edition, Ernst &
Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin,
Germany.
[3] German Geotechnical Design: DIN 1054:1976-11: Subsoil; Permissible Loading of
Subsoil.
[4] Prof. Dr. Johann Buß: GGU-STABILITY User Manual, Civilserve GmbH, Steinfeld,
2019.
[5] PLAXIS 3D Fundation Tutorial Manual version 1.5, Delft University of Tehnology &
Plaxis bv, 2006, The Netherlands.
[6] 'U0LWURYLü P.: Sanacija klizišta i nedovoljno nosivog tla. AGM knjiga . Beograd 2014.
293
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.138.26
*(267$7,ý.,3525$ý81,6$1$&,-(
KLIZIŠTA ŠIPOVIMA
6ORERGDQûRULü, 'UDJRVODY5DNLü'XãDQ%HULVDYOMHYLü
Univerzitet u Beogradu, Rudarsko-JHRORãNLIDNXOWHWĈXãLQD
sloba.coric@gmail.com
REZIME
8 RYRP UDGX VX SROD]HüL RG UH]XOWDWD JHRWHKQLþNLK LVWUDåLYDQMD SULND]DQL JHRVWDWLþNL
SURUDþXQL VDQDFLMH NOL]LãWD YHUWLNDOQLP ãLSRYLPD 0HWRGRORJLMD SURUDþXQD MH VORåHQD MHU
SRGUD]XPHYD LQWHUDNFLMX NOL]LãWD L VWDELOL]LUDMXüLK ãLSRYD 6WRJD VH VLPXOWDQR DQDOL]LUDMX
stabilnost klizišta i stabilnost šipova. 3ULOLNRPRGUHÿLYDQMDERþQHRWSRUQRVWLWODRNRãLSRYD
koristi se metRGD%ULQþ+DQVHQDNRMDX]LPDXRE]LUWURGLPHQ]LRQDOQHXVORYHXWOXLPRåHGD
VHSULPHQLXVORåHQLPJHRORãNLPXVORYLPDNRMLVXþHVWLX6UELML$QDOL]HVWDELOQRVWLNOL]LãWD
YUãH VH RGJRYDUDMXüLP PHWRGDPD JUDQLþQH UDYQRWHåH 3UHGORåHQLP SRVWXSNRP SURUDþXQD
omRJXüHQR MH GD RWSRUQRVW þLWDYH NOL]QH SRYUãLQH X VDGHMVWYX VD ãLSRYLPD, realizuje
zahtevanu vrednost faktora sigurnosti klizišta. U vezi sa tim, u radu su prikazani svi bitni
þLQLRFL
./-8ý1(5(ý,sanacija klizišta, interakcija klizišta i šipa, ERþQDRWSRUQRVWãLSRYD

stabilnost klizišta i šipova
GEOSTATIC CALCULATIONS FOR LANDSLIDE

STABILIZATION BY PILES
ABSTRACT
In the paper are presented, on the basis of the geotechnical investigations results, geostatic
calculations for landslide stabilisation by vertical piles. The calculation methodology is
complex, because it is based on the interaction between landslide and stability piles. In
accordance to that, landslide stability analysis and pile stability analysis are carried out
simultaneously.The lateral resistance of piles is calculated by Brinch Hansen method. It
includes three-dimensional effects of surrounding soil and can be applied in complex
geological conditions which are very often in Serbia. The landslide stability is analysed by
appropriate limit equilibrium methods. In proposed calculation procedure is assumed that
complete sliding surface, together with piles, contribute to a target value of safety factor of
the landslide. Accordingly, all relevant factors are presented in the paper.
KEY WORDS: landslide stabilization, landslide-pile interaction, lateral resistance of piles,

stability of landslide and piles
294
UVOD
Prilikom sanacije klizišta važno je, pre svega, poznavanje geoloških karakteristika terena a
posebno oblika kliznog telaþYUVWRüHVPLFDQMDGXåNOL]QHSRYUãLQHLVWDQMDSRG]HPQLKYRGD
8YH]LVDWLPWUHEDUHüLGDXQDMYHüHPEURMXVOXþDMHYDNOL]LãWDX6UELML]DYLVHRGJHRORãNLK
XVORYD X WHUHQX =ERJ WRJD WUHED GD VH YUãL GHWDOMQR SURXþDYDQMH VYDNRJ SRMHGLQDþQRJ
klizišta, analizira njegova stabilnost i definišu optimalne sanacione mere (Lokin i sar., 2000).
8 RYRP UDGX üHPR SROD]HüL RG WRJD GD VX SUHWKRGQR L]YUãHQD JHRWHKQLþND LVWUDåLYDQMD
SULND]DWLJHRVWDWLþNHSURUDþXQHNRMLVHNRULVWHNRGVDQDFLMHNOL]LãWDvertikalnim šipovima.
2'5(Ĉ,9$1-(%2ý1(126,9267,7/$0(72'20%5,1ý+$16(1$
2GUHÿLYDQMH ERþQH QRVLYRVWL YHUWLNDOQRJ ãLSD RSWHUHüHQRJ KRUL]RQWDOQRP VLORP MH VORåHQ
LQåHQMHUVNLSUREOHPNRMLMHSRVOHGLFDLQWHUDNFLMHãLSDLRNROQRJWOD2Q]DYLVLRGþYUVWRüH
okolnog WODNUXWRVWLãLSDQDþLQDRVODQMDQMDQMHJRYHJODYHNDRLRGUDVWRMDQMDL]PHÿXãLSRYD
3ULOLNRPRGUHÿLYDQMDERþQHQRVLYRVWLWODRNRãLSDSRSUDYLOXVHþLQHRGUHÿHQDXSURãüHQMD
NDNRELVHGRELORUHãHQMHNRMHMHSULKYDWOMLYR]DJHRWHKQLþNXSUDNsu. To se može da uradi na
YLãHQDþLQDIto, et al, 1975; Tomlinson, 1980)DXRYRPUDGXPLüHPRSULND]DWLPHWRGX
%ULQþ+DQVHQD
%ULQþ +DQVHQ Hansen, 1961) je SUHGORåLR PHWRGX ]D RGUHÿLYDQMH ERþQH RWSRUQRVWL WOD
RSWHUHüHQRJKRUL]RQWDOQRPVLORP+6OLND 1).
6OLND0HWRGD%ULQþ+DQVHQD
Figure 1. Brinch Hansen’s method
295

Ova metoda se odnosi na krute vertikalne šipove koji, pod dejstvom sile H, rotiraju oko tačke
O. Veličina bočnih pritisaka L, koja uzima u obzir trodimenzionalne uslove u kojima se šip
nalazi i koja predstavlja razliku bočnih pritisaka, ispred i iza šipa, određuje se iz sledeće
jednačine:
σ L = q  K q +c  K c (1)
gde je:
L – bočni pritisak na dubini z
q = V – vertikalni napon na dubini z
c – kohezija
Kq, Kc – koeficijenti bočnog pritiska tla
Dijagrami za određivanje koeficijenta Kq i Kc dati su na Slikama 2 i 3. Na ovim dijagramima

B je širina/prečnik šipa, a  je ugao unutrašnjeg trenja.
Slika 2. Koeficijent bočnog pritiska tla koji Slika 3. Koeficijent bočnog pritiska tla koji
zavisi od vertikalnog napona zavisi od kohezije (Brinč Hansen, 1961)
Figure 2. Coefficient of lateral pressure which is Figure 3. Coefficient of lateral pressure which is
dependent of vertical stress dependent of cohesion (Brinch-Hansen, 1961)
(Brinch-Hansen, 1961)
Brinč Hansenova metoda može da se primeni i u homogenim i u heterogenim terenskim

uslovima i to kako za drenirane tako i za nedrenirane uslove. Stoga je ona pogodna za
primenu u složenim terenskim uslovima koji su česti u Srbiji (Ćorić i sar., 2018).
296

Rešavanjem odgovarajućih jednačina ravnoteže, kojima se definiše ponašanje vertikalnog

šipa, određuje se granična horizontalna sila koja može da deluje na šip. Na osnovu toga
projektuju se stabilizacione mere i vrši se sanacija klizišta šipovima.
ANALIZA STABILNOSTI KLIZIŠTA I SANACIONIH ŠIPOVA
Klizišta su, kao i druge pojave nestabilnosti terena, tesno povezana sa svojstvima geološke
sredine u kojoj se javljaju. S tim u vezi od posebnog je značaja, za izbor optimalnog načina
sanacije, to što su položaj i oblik površine klizanja, po pravilu, predisponirani oslabljenim
zonama koje predstavljaju mehančke diskontinuitete geološke sredine. I oni se moraju,
geotehničkim istraživanjima na terenu, otkriti. Ovim istraživanjima se, zapravo, utvrđuju
najbitniji parametri za analizu stabilnosti i izbor sanacionog rešenja za klizište.
U ovom radu ćemo prikazati geostatičke proračune sanacije klizišta vertikalnim šipovima.
Pri tome polazimo od uslova da su geotehničkim istraživanjima određeni svi parametri
potrebni za projektovanje sanacionih mera (Hutchinson, 1977).
Sanacija klizišta šipovima predstavlja vrlo složen problem koji zavisi kako od klizišta tako i
od šipova, odnosno od njihove interakcije. Zato njegovo rešavanje uključuje:
- analizu stabilnosti klizišta i
- analizu stabilnosti šipova.
Ovo će biti prikazano u nastavku teksta.
PROVERA STABILNOSTI KLIZIŠTA I ODREĐIVANJE ČVRSTOĆE

SMICANJA DUŽ KLIZNE POVRŠINE
Analiza stablinosti klizišta, i kosina uopšte, vrši se po pravilu metodama granične ravnoteže
i na osnovu toga se određuje faktor sigurnosti Fs (Duncan et al., 2005; Ćorić, 2017).
U trenutku klizanja kosina/klizište se nalazi u stanju granične ravnoteže i faktor sigurnosti je

jednak jedinici. Polazeći od toga, povratnom analizom može da se odredi prosečna čvrstoća
smicanja duž klizne površine tla av (Slika 4), a u slučaju reaktiviranja starih klizišta, na ovaj
način se određuje rezidualna čvrstoća (Chandler, 1977).
Slika 4. Površina klizanja

Figure 4. Sliding surface
297
ýYUVWRüDVPLFDQMDPRåHGDVHRGUHGLLRGJRYDUDMXüLPODERUDWRULMVNLPRSLWLPDLQDWDMQDþLQ
mogu da se provere vrednosti dobijene povratnom analizom.
2'5(Ĉ,9$1-(6,/(.2-$2%(=%(Ĉ8-(=$+7(9$1,)$.725
SIGURNOSTI KLIZIŠTA
8 SRVWXSNX VDQDFLMH NOL]LãWDNRVLQD SRWUHEQR MH RGUHGLWL YHOLþLQX VLOH + s NRMD REH]EHÿXMH
zahtevani faktor sigurnosti F s (Slika 5). ,QWHQ]LWHWRYHVLOHRGUHÿXMHVHDQDOL]DPDVWDELOQRVWL
6OLND6WDELOL]LUDMXüDVLOD
Figure 5. Stabilizing force
0LQLPDOQDYUHGQRVWIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWL]DVWDWLþNHXVORYHMH) s = 1.2 – 1.5, DXVOXþDMXGHMVWYD

zemljotresa F s = 1.1.
2'5(Ĉ,9$1-(%2ý1(126,9267,â,329$
%RþQHSULWLVNHQDãLSRYHRGUHGLüHPRSULPHQRPPHWRGH%ULQþ+DQVHQD3ULWRPHYHOLþLQX
horizontalne sile H p RGUHÿXMHPRL]MHGQDþLQHVXPLUDQMHPERþQLKQDSRQDNRMLGHOXMXQD
šip u kliznom telu (Slika 6).
6OLND3URUDþXQVWDELOQRVWLãLSRYD
Figure 6. Calculation of pile stability
298
5HãDYDQMHPVOHGHüLKMHGQDþLQDUDYQRWHåH
F1 - F2 = H p (2)
F1 e1= F2 e2 (3)
oGUHÿXMHPR GXåLQX / 0 RGQRVQR SRORåDM WDþNH URWDFLMH 2 NDR L GXåLQX ãLSD LVSRG NOL]QH
površine L b 2YX GXåLQX EL WUHEDOR ]ERJ VLJXUQRVWL SRYHüDWL ]D § 1D WDM QDþLQ MH
]DGRYROMHQD JHRWHKQLþND QRVLYRVW ãLSD Navfac, 1982; Poulos et al., 1980 $ ãWR VH WLþH
NRQVWUXNWLYQHQRVLYRVWLãLSDGDELVHRQDREH]EHGLODSRWUHEQRMHGDVH]DRYDNRRGUHÿHQu
silu H p RGUHGHSUHVHþQHVLOHXšipu, a zatim da se izvrši dimenzionisanje šipa. U vezi sa tim
WUHEDUHüLGDXNROLNRMHNRQVWUXNWLYQDQRVLYRVWãLSDPDQMDRGJHRWHKQLþNHQRVLYRVWLãLSDRQGD
MHRQDPHURGDYQD]DRGUHÿLYDQMHLQWHQ]LWHWDKRUL]RQWDOQHsile koju šip može da prihvati.
2'5(Ĉ,9$1-( 5$672-$1-$ ,=0(Ĉ8 â,329$ .2-( 2%(=%(Ĉ8-(

POTREBNU STABILNOST KLIZIŠTA
2VRYLQVNRUDVWRMDQMHL]PHÿXãLSRYDs (Slika 7) odredjuMHPRL]VOHGHüHMHGQDþLQH
Hp (4)
s=
Hs
Slika 7. Klizište sanirano šipovima

Figure 7. Landslide stabilized by piles
1D RYDM QDþLQ REH]EHÿXMHPR UHDlizaciju potrebne otporne sile H s , odnosno dobijanje
traženog faktora sigurnosti, za klizište sanirano šipovima.
299
PROVERA STABILNOSTI SANIRANOG KLIZIŠTA
Kada proveravamo stabilnost klizišta saniranog šipovima (Slika 7), polazimo od uslova da
se superponiraju otpori tla duž klizne površine i otpori koji su posledica interakcije šipa i
okolnog tla. Tako da se faktor sigurnosti F s RGUHÿXMHL]VOHGHüHMHGQDþLQH
Rs +H s (5)
Fs =
Ds
gde je:
R s – otporne sile u klizištu
H s – otporne sile od šipova
D s – JXUDMXüHVLOHXNOL]LãWX
2YDNYLPSULVWXSRPSUREOHPXRGUHÿLYDQMDVWDELOQRVWLNOL]LãWDRPRJXüHQRMHGDVH
- otporne sile, duž þLWDYHNOL]QHSRYUãLQHRGXSLUXNOL]DQMXL

- deo kliznog tela, koji je ispred šipova, XNOMXþLXUHDlizivanje otporne sile H s .
Kao posledica ovoga, dobija se racionalno rešenje sanacije klizišta vertikalnim šipovima.
,QDþHVYHDQDOL]HVWDELOQRVWLNOL]LãWDYUãHVHSRSUDYLOXPHWRGDPDJUDQLþQHUDYQRWHåH8
JHRWHKQLþNRMSUDNVLNRGQDVVH]DVORåHQHNOL]QHSRYUãLQH, þHVWRNRULVWHPHWRGH-DQEXDL
0RUJHQVWHUQ3UDMVD$XVOXþDMXNUXåQLKNOL]QLKSRYUãLQDNRULVWLVHPHWRGD%LãRSDLWDGDVH
u MHGQDþLQLXPHVWRVLODMDYOMDMXPRPHQWL
=$./-8ý$.
GeoVWDWLþNLPSURUDþXQLPDVDQDFLMHNOL]LãWDWUHEDGDSUHWKRGHJHRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDNRMLPD
VHRGUHÿXMXQDMELWQLMLSDUDPHWUL]DDQDOL]XVWDELOQRVWLLVDQDFLMXNOL]LãWD
Sanacija klizišta vertikalnim šipovima je posledica interakcije šipa i okolnog tla. Stoga je, u
postupku projektovanja sanacionih mera, potrebno da se izvrši simultana analiza stabilnosti
NOL]LãWDLVWDELOL]LUDMXüLKãLSRYD
2GUHÿLYDQMHERþQHJHRWHKQLþNHQRVLYRVWLYHUWLNDOQih šipova je trodimenzionalni problem i

PRåHXVSHãQRGDVHUHãLSULPHQRPPHWRGH%ULQþ+DQVHQD2YDPHWRGDPRåHXVSHãQRGDVH
SULPHQLQDNOL]LãWLPDXVORåHQLPJHRWHKQLþNLPXVORYLPDNRMLVXþHVWLX6UELML
$QDOL]HVWDELOQRVWLNOL]LãWDYUãHVHRGJRYDUDMXüLP PHWRGDPDJUDQLþQHUDYQRWHåH3ULWRPH
SROD]L VH RG XVORYD GD RWSRUQRVWL NOL]QH SRYUãLQH L ãLSRYD ]GUXåHQR GRSULQRVH SRYHüDQMX
stabilnosti klizišta.
300
U radu su prikazani svi elementi koji predloženu mHWRGRORJLMXSURUDþXQDVDQLUDQMDNOL]LãWD

ãLSRYLPD þLQH FHORYLWRP 8 YH]L VD WLP WUHED QDJODVLWL GD QMHQD SULPHQD SRGUD]XPHYD
SUDYLOQRLQåHQMHUVNRUDVXÿLYDQMHXVYLPID]DPDSURMHNWRYDQMDVDQDFLRQRJUHãHQMD
LITERATURA:
Chandler, R.J.: Back analysis techniques for slope stabilization works: a case record. Geotechnique
Vol. 27, No. 4, 1977, pp. 479-495.
ûRULü6*HRVWDWLþNLSURUDþXQL,9L]GDQMHýasopis Izgradnja i Srpsko društvo za mehaniku tla i
JHRWHKQLþNRLQåHQMHUVWYR%HRJUDG str. 460.
ûRULü65DNLü'ûRULü6W%DVDULü,%RþQDQRVLYRVWLSRPHUDQMDYHUWLNDOQLKãLSRYD
RSWHUHüHQLKKRUL]RQWDOQLPVLODPD*UDÿHYLQVNLPDWHULMDOLLNRQVWUXNFLMHEU, 2018, pp.
111-127.
Duncan, J.M., Wright, S.G.: Soil strength and slope stability, John Wiley & Sons, New Yersey, 2005,
pp. 297.
Hansen, J. B.: The ultimate resistance of rigid piles against transversal forces, Danish Geotechnical
Institute, Bulletin No. 12, Copenhagen, 1961.
Hutchinson, J.N.: The assesment of the effectiveness of corrective measures in relation to geological
conditions and types of slope movement, Bulletin IAEG., No. 16, 1977, pp..131-155.
Ito, T., Matsui, T., Methods to estimate lateral force acting on stabilizing piles, Soil and Foundation,
Vol. 15, No. 4, 1975., pp. 43-59.
/RNLQ3ûRULü60HWRGRORJLMDLVWUDåLYDQMDNOL]LãWD5XGDUVWYR%URM-18, Tuzla, 2000.
NAVFAC, Design Manual DM -7.1., Soil mechanics, Department of the Navy, Alexandria, 1982.
Poulos, H. G. and Davis, E. H.: Pile foundation analysis and design, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
1980.
Tomlinson, M. J.: Foundation design and construction, The Pitman book, London, 1980.
301
UDK 624.131.537
STABILNOST KOSINA ANIZOTROPNE

STENSKE MASE ANALIZIRANA PRIMENOM
',5(.&,21,+02'(/$ý95672û(
=RUDQ%HULVDYOMHYLü*, 'XãDQ%HULVDYOMHYLü**,
äHOMNRäXJLü
* Koridori Srbije d.o.o, Kralja Petra 21, Beograd, berisavljevic_zoran@yahoo.com
** 6DREUDüDMQL,QVWLWXW&,31HPDQMLQD%HRJUDGdusan.berisavljevic@sicip.co.rs
***Vlada Republike Srbije, Kancelarija za Upravljanje javnim ulaganjima,
Nemanjina 22, zzugic@gmail.com
REZIME
U radu je prikazan postupak analize stabilnosti kosine anizotropne stenske maseþLMDVPLþXüD
þYUVWRüD YDULUD X zavisnosti od položaja klizne površi u odnosu na površ diskontinuiteta.
1DMSUHMHLVWDNQXW]QDþDMDQL]RWURSLMHVWHQVNHPDVHLQMHQXWLFDMQDVWDELOQRVWNRVLQD=DWLP
MHGDWDWHRULMVNDRVQRYDQHNROLNRSRSXODUQLKGLUHNFLRQLKVPLþXüLKPRGHODLQDNUDMXMHQD
jednom primeru kosine izvedene u škriljcima SULND]DQD QMLKRYD SUDNWLþQD SULPHQD 8
SURUDþXQLPD MH NRULãüHQD PHWRGD JUDQLþQH UDYQRWHåH 8RNYLUX ]DNOMXþND YHRPDMH YDåQR
LVWDüLGDNDGDVHUDYQLDQL]RWURSLMHX]PXXRE]LUSULOLNRPSURUDþXQDVWDELOQRVWLGRELMDju se
niže vrednosti faktora sigurnosti.
./-8ý1(5(ý,anizotropija, pukotine, direkcioni modeli, graniþQDUDYQRWHåDIDNWRU

sigurnosti
SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS OF ANISOTROPIC

ROCK MASSES WITH DIRECTIONAL STRENGTH
MODELS
ABSTRACT
This study shows an example of slope stability analysis of cut slope excavated in anisotropic
rock mass. For the rock mass considered the value of shear strength depends on the angle
between slice base and discontinuity dip angle. The importance of anisotropy and its
influence on cut slope stability is emphasized, following the short theoretical framework of
several commonly used directional models. At the end, the case study is presented showing
an application of directional model for predicting the failure of high cut slope excavated in
schist rock material. 2D limit equilibrium method was used to perform slope stability
analysis. By considering anisotropy the lower safety factor value is obtained compared to
isotropic scenario.
KEY WORDS: anisotropy, shear strength, directional models, limit equilibrium, factor of
safety
302
UVOD
$QL]RWURSLMD MH NDUDNWHULVWLND PDWHULMDOD GD X UD]OLþLWLP SUDYFLPD LPD UD]OLþLWD VYRMVWYD
Stenske mase su po pravilu gotovo uvek anizotropni materijali, što je posledica prisustva
diskontinuiteta, tj. ispucalosti. Diskontinuiteti su formirani u toku stvaranja (sedimentacija,
metamorfizam, magmatizam) i naknadnih tektonskih pokreta stenske mase. Anizotropija se
PRåH UD]PDWUDWL VD DVSHNWD þYUVWRüH GHIRUPDELOQRVWL EU]LQH SURVWLUDQMD HODVWLþQLK WDODVD
vodopropusnosti LQDSRQVNRJVWDQMD5DGLNRULãüHQMDXJHRVWDWLþNLPSURUDþXQLPD potrebno
MH SULNXSLWL VOHGHüH SRGDWNH R SXNRWLQDPD VD WHUHQD: azimut padne prave, padni ugao,
UDVWRMDQMH L]PHÿX SXNRWLQD MHGQH IDPLOLMH NYDOLWHW ]LGRYD SXNRWLQD YHOLþLQu zeva,
kontinualnost, hrapavost i vrstu LVSXQH3UYDGYDSRGDWNDVHSULNXSOMDMXNODVLþQLPSRVWXSNRP
(merenjem geološkim kompasom) ili primenom fotogrametrijeskog ili laserskog snimanja
(LIDAR). Ostali podaci se moraju prikupiti neposrednim opažanjem kosine. Tako prikupljeni
podaci se koriste za kvantitativne i kvalitativne analize i ukazuju na moguünost pojave
RGUHÿHQRJWLSDORPDXVWHQVNRMPDVL
8VOXþDMXNDGDVXGLVNRntinuiteti na veoma bliskom rastojanju (10-ak cm) i nepovoljno su

RULMHQWLVDQLQSUNDOLFXNRVLQHQHSUDNWLþQRMHGLVNUHWQRSUHGVWDYOMDWLVYDNLGLVNRQWLQXLWHW
SRQDRVRE X QXPHULþNRP PRGHOX QSU ]D VWHQVNX PDVX preko 40 m sa rastojanjem
diskontinuiteta od 10 cm potrebno je diskretno predstaviti preko 400 pukotina), te se tada
PRJXNRULVWLWLGLUHNFLRQLPRGHOL3ULPHULWLSLþQLKDQL]RWURSQLKVWHQVNLKPDVDVXSULND]DQLQD
VOLFL .RVLQD X *UGHOLþNRM NOLVXUL (slika 1a) je formirana u paleozoMVNRP ãNULOMFX L ELüH
predmet detaljne analize. Kosina na autoputu E763 (deonica Ljig-Preljina) je formirana u
Ljiškom flišu. 8 RYRP UDGX üH ELWL UD]PDWUDQD DQL]RWURSLMD SR SDUDPHWULPD þYUVWRüH QD
smicanje.
a) b)
Slika 1. Primeri anizotropne stenske mase a) kRVLQDX*UGHOLþNRMNOLVXULEkosina na autoputu E763

Figure 1. An example of anisotropic rock mass a) rock cutting located in Grdelica gorge, b) highway
E763 rock cutting
303
KLASIFIKACIJA INHERENTNE I STRUKTURNE ANIZOTROPIJE
U zavisnosti od razmere posmatranja anizotropija može biti inherentna (na nivou uzorka) i
strukturna (na nivou stenske mase). -HGDQ RG QDþLQD GD VH DQL]RWURSLMD RGUHGL Qa nivou
uzorka jeste da se izvrše merenja u uslovima jednoaksijalne kompresije QDWDMQDþLQãWRVH
XJDRSRGNRMLPVHQDQRVLRSWHUHüHQMHȕ varira u odnosu na ravni anizotropije. Tada se može
formirati GLMDJUDPNDRQDVOLFLD,QGHNVDQL]RWURSLMHSUHGVDWDYOMDRGQRVQDMYHüHSRGXJORP
od ȕ=0ͼ ili 90ͼ L QDMPDQMH þYUVWRüH RELþQR SRG XJORP RG ȕ=30-45ͼ). Na prikazanom
primeru se može videti da je za sveži filit indeks anizotropije R c oko 2,2, što ovaj uzorak
svrstava u umereno anizotropnu stensku masu prema klasifikaciji prikazanoj u tabeli 1.
Klasifikacija anizotropije na uzorku se može izvršiti i nD RVQRYX LQGHNVD WDþNDVWRJ
RSWHUHüHQMD I Į , tabela 1.
Tabela 1. Klasifikacija anizotropije na osnovu jednoaksijalne (Ramamurthy, 1993) LLQGHNVDWDþNDVWH

þYUVWRüH(Tsidzi, 1990)
Table 1. Anisotropy classification based on uniaxial (Ramamurthy, 1993) and point load strength
(Tsidzi, 1990)
Indeks anizotropije - I Į Indeks anizotropije - R c Opis

Kvazi izotropna
< 1.1 1.0 – 1.1
(izotropna)
1.1 – 1.5 1.1 – 2.0 'HOLPLþQRDQL]RWURSQD
1.5 – 2.5 2.0 – 4.0 Umereno anizotropna

2.5 – 3.5 4.0 – 6.0 Veoma anizotropna
> 3.5 > 6.0 Izrazito anizotropna
Klasifikacija na nivou stenske mase se može izvršiti primenom pogodnog klasifikacionog

VLVWHPD9HüLQDklasifikacionih sistema koji se koriste u praksi (RMR, Q, GSI) ne razmatraju
anizotropiju direktno. U tom smislu se predlaže da se, u zavisnosti od oblasti primene,
anizotropija stenske mase razmatra primenom ARMR (Saroglou i sar. 2018) i Q-slope
(Barton i Bar, 2015) sistema. Ovde se napominje da je prilikom konvencionalnih razmatranja
VWHQVNXPDVXPRJXüH definisati primenom izotropnog klasifikacionog sistema (npr. GSI), a
zatim tako definisanim parametrima stenske mase dodati dominantne ravni anizotropije, slika
2b. Ovaj postupak je primenjen u radu.
304
a)
b)
Slika 2. a) Ispitivanje anizotropije na uzorku filita (Sabatakakis i Tsiambaos, 1983), b) Šematski

prikaz kombinovanja ispucale stenske mase i dominantne familije pukotina (Fortisakis i sar., 2012)
Figure 2. a) Testing of anisotropy on phyllite sample (Sabatakakis and Tsiambaos, 1983), b)
Schematics of combination of the internal rock mass and the dominant discontinuities (Fortisakis et
al., 2012)
POSTAVKA PROBLEMA
U toku izrade projekta kosine 2 (slika 1a), dužine 735 m, visine preko 40 m, u sklopu deonice
autoputa Niš-6NRSOMHSULPHüHQRMHGDVWHQVNDPDVDLPDL]UD]LWDDQL]RWURSQDVYRMVWYD8WRP
smislu je izvršeno preko 20 opita smicanja duž prirodnih diskontinuiteta i dobijeni su VOHGHüL
rasponi vrednosti kohezije L XJOD VPLþXüH RWSRUQRVWi: c=6-27kPa i ĳ -36ͼ. Pod
SUHWSRVWDYNRP RGUHÿHQRJ SURFHQWXDOQRJ XþHãüD PDWHULMDOQLK PRVWRYD X XNXSQRM GXåLQL
diskontinuiteta unutar stenske mase parametri su odabrani tako da približno odgovaraju
JRUQMRMJUDQLþQRMYUHGQRVWLSULND]DQLKLQWHUYDODF=25kPa, ĳ ͼ. Kartiranjem lica kosine
izvršena je klasifikacija stenske mase prema kvantifikovanom GSI dijagramu %HULVDYOMHYLü
i sar. 2018), ]DQHPDUXMXüLSULWRPXWLFDMGRPLQDQWQRJSXNRWLQVNRJVLVWHPD8WYUÿLYDQMHPL
ostalih laboratorijskih parametara, koji figurišu u Hoek-Brown-ovom (HB) kriterijumu loma,
definisani su ekvivalentni Mohr-Coulomb-ovi (MC) parametri ]D RGJRYDUDMXüL QLYR ı 3
napona) þYUVWRüHVWHQVNHPDVHNDR c=120kPa, ĳ ͼ. Detalji oko usvajanja merodavnih
parametara drugih sredina VHPRJXQDüL X%HULVDYOMHYLü2018). Ovako prikupljeni podaci o
VWHQVNRM PDVL L SXNRWLQDPD RPRJXüLOL VX SULPHQX GLUHNFLRQLK PRGHOD MRã X UDQRM ID]L
preprojektovanja kosine. 8WRPSRJOHGXJHRWHKQLþNLHODERUDW*5)%HRJUDG2016) uzima
XRE]LUUD]PDWUDQMHDQL]RWURSLMHSULþHPXVXSUHGORåHQHPHUHRMDþDQMDNRVLQHGUXJDþLMHJ
NDUDNWHUDLRELPDRGSUHGORåHQLKXJUDÿHYLQVNRPGHOXSURMHNWD7DNRÿHVXGDWHSUHSRUXNHX
FLOMX RMDþDQMD NRVLQH L]UDGRP SUHGQDSUHJQXWLK DQNHUD QD YHRPD EOLVNRP UDVWRMDQMX L
formiranje geometrije kosine sa bermama (5:1=v:h)SULþHPXQLMHUD]PDWUDQDYDULMDQWDVD
verikalnim zasecanjem.
305
FORMULACIJA DIREKCIONIH MODELA
3RVWRMHEURMQLSULPHULNRULãüHQMD direkcionih modela za analizu anizotropne stenske mase

kako u 2D, tako i u 3D uslovima (Bar i Weekes, 2017; Bar i McQuillan, 2018; Bar i sar. 2016
itd.). Stabilnost predmetne kosine je analizirana primenom dva direkciona modela koji su
LPSOHPHQWLUDQLXVRIWYHUVNLSDNHW6OLGH5RFVFLHQFH,QFWHüHRYGHXNUDWNRELWLprikazane
njihove formulacije. Anizotropija je karaNWHULVWLþQD]DXPHUHQRLVSXFDOLãNULOMDFR]QDNDS).
Pretpostavka direkcionih modela MH GD VX UDYQL DQL]RWURSLMH NRQWLQXDOQH ýYUVWRüD Me
„osrednjena vrednost“ L]PHÿXSDUDPHWDra pukotina i stenskih mostova.
ýHWLULNOMXþQHNRPponente direkcionih modela su:

þYUVWRüDVWHQVNHPDVH;
þYUVWRüDUDYQLDQL]RWURSLMH
3) orijentacija ravni anizotropije i
SUHOD]L]PHÿXþYUVWRüHSXNRWLQDLþYUVWRüHVWHQVNHPDVH.
Prvi direkcioni model, tzv. anizotropni linearni, SUHOD]QX]RQXL]PHÿXþYUVWRüHVWHQVNHPDVH

i pukotina uzima u razmatranje preko uglovnih parametara A i B, slika 3. Parametar A
R]QDþDYDUDVSRQXJORYDXRNYLUXNRMLKüHVHED]LODPHOHXNROLNRVHRQDQDÿHXQXWDUWRJ
uglovonog domena, SULSLVDWLþYUVWRüDGLskontinuiteta. Parametar B GHILQLãHSUHOD]NDþYUVWRüL
VWHQVNHPDVH8NROLNRMHQDJLEODPHOHYHüLRGXJODB, tada se bazi lamele SULSLVXMHþYUVWRüD
VWHQVNH PDVH 8NROLNR VH QDJLE ODPHOH QDOD]L L]PHÿX XJORYQLK SDUDPHWDUD A i B, tada se
þYUVWRüDXED]LODPHOHRGUHÿXMHOLQHDUQRPIXQNFLMRP6QRZGHQ2007). 2JUDQLþHQMHRYRJ
modela je to što se prilikom definisanja SDUDPHWDUDVPLþXüHþYUVWRüHGLVNRQWLQXLWHWDLVWHQVNH
mase mogu koristiti samo MC parametri.
Generalizovani anizotropni model QHPDRJUDQLþHQMDXSRJOHGXNRULãüHQMDXOD]QLKSDUDPWDUD

ýYUVWRüDGLVNRQWLQXLWHWDLSXNRWLQDPRåHELWLRSLVDQDELORNRMLPNULWHULMXPRPkoji postoji u
softveru. Prilikom njegove formulacije se pretpostavlja da su parametri definisani u
diskretnim uglovnim domenima, slika 4a2YR]QDþLGDXNROLNRMHQDJLEGLVNRQWLQXLWHWDQD
terenu meren npr. od 45 do 50ͼ, a azimut padne prave se poklapa sa azimutom lica kosine, u
tom uglovnom opsegu se bazi lamele SULSLVXMXSDUDPHWULþYUVWRüHGLVNRQWLQXLWHWDGRNMHX
ostalLPXJORYQLPRSVH]LPDPHURGDYQDþYUVWRüDVWHQVNHPDVH „Prividan pad“ je merodavan
X VOXþDMX QHSRNODSDQMD D]LPXWD ' PRGHOD L D]LPXWD GLVNRQWLQXLWHWD 2YR X L]YHVQLP
VOXþDMHYLPDNRG'PRGHODPRåHGRYHVWLGRSUHYLãHNRQ]HUYDWLYQLKLOLQHNRQ]HUYDWLYQLK
rezultata. „Pravi“ padni ugao se može uzeti u obzir kod 3D modela, slika 4b. 9HüH
SRMHGLQDþQHGLVNRQWLQXLWHWHQSUUDVHGQHSRYUãLWUHEDWUHWLUDWLGLVNUHWQR
306
Slika 3. Šematski prikaz anizotropnog linearnog modela (Snowden, 2007)

Figure 3. Schematics of anisotropic linear model (Snowden, 2007)
a) b)
Slika 4. Generalizovani anizotropni model a) Slide2, b) proširen na tri dimenzije, sa uglovnim

parametrima A i B, Slide3
Figure 4. Generalized anisotropic model a) Slide2, b) extension to 3D conditions with A and B angle
parameters, Slide3
5(=8/7$7,3525$ý81$
5H]XOWDWLDQDOL]DVWDELOQRVWLQDNULWLþQRPSUHVHNXVXSULND]DQLQDVOLFL8SUYRPVOXþDMXMH
RGUHÿHQDYHOLþLQDIDNWRUDsigurnosti za pretpostavku o izotropnoj stenskoj masi, slika 5a.
307
a)
b)
Slika 5. a) 5H]XOWDWLSURUDþXQDXVOXþDMXDL]RWURSLMHEDQL]RWURSLMHVWHQVNHPDVH

Figure 5. Results of slope stability analysis for a) isotropic case, b) anisotropic case
Može VH]DNOMXþLWL GDMHYHOLþLQDIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLRG)26 VDVYLP]DGRYROMDYDMXüD8

VOXþDMXUD]PDWUDQMDDQL]RWURSLMH, uz primenu generalizovanog anizotropnog modela, dobija
VH YHOLþLQD IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG )26 ãWR X SUDNWLþQim okolnostima indikuje lom.
Optimizacijom klizne površi, dobila bi se unekoliko manja vrednost faktora sigurnosti.
,PDMXüL X YLGX þLQMHQLFX GD MH GRãOR GR SRMDYH QHVWDELOQRVWL SUHGPHWQH NRVLQH X ]RQL
razmatranog preseka, primena anizotropnih modela je u potpunosti opravdana, slika 6.
308
Slika 6. 5H]XOWDWLSURUDþXQDXVOXþDMXDL]RWURQLKXVORYDEDQL]RWURSLMH

Figure 6. Results of slope stability analysis for a) isotropic case and, b) anisotropic case
U okviru dijagrama na slici 7 prikazana je SURPHQDVPLþXüHþYUVWRüHL]UDþXQDWDQDRVQRYX

0&NULWHULMXPDORPD]DVOXþDML]RWURSQHLDQL]RWURSQHVWHQVNHPDVH
a) b)
Slika 7. a) ýYUVWRüDVWHQVNHPDVH]DQRUPDOQLQDSRQRGN3DLN3DD]DL]RWURSQLPDWHULMDO

b) za razmatrani anizotropni materijal
Figure 7. Shear strength of rock mass for the values of normal stresses of 200 kPa and 400 kPa,
respectively a) for isotropic material and b) for anisotropic material considered
309
Kalibracijom paramtara anizotropnog linearnog PRGHOD GRELMDMX VH VOHGHüH QDMEROMH

SURFHQMHQHYUHGQRVWLSDUDPHWDUD$%LXJODL]PHÿXSDGDSDGQHSUDYHLKRUL]RQWDOH$ ͼ,
B=30ͼ, ugao=52ͼ.
6D RYDNR RGUHÿHQLP SDUDPHWULPD L]YUãHQD MH SDUDPHWDUVND DQDOL]D X ORJLþQRP UDVSRQX
vrednosti parametara. Promene pojedinih parametara uz konstantnu vrednost druga dva (npr.
parameter A se varira od 5 do 15ͼ, SULþHPXMH B=30ͼ, ugao=52ͼ) su prikazane na slici 8. Sa
VOLNH VH PRåH ]DNOMXþLWL GD SDUDPWDU $ L XJDR QDJLED DQL]RWURSQLK UDYQL LPDMX XWLFDM QD
YHOLþLQX IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL 0DQML SDUDPWDU $ ]QDþL L RVWDYOMDQMH PDQMH SURVWRUD NOL]QRM
SRYUãLGDVHQDÿHX]RQLVPLþXüHþYUVWRüHGLVNRQWLQXLWHWD8UD]PDWUDQRPVOXþDMXNDGDMH
ugao A manji od oko 8ͼ, faktor sigurnosti SRþLQMHGDUDVWHâWRVHXJODQDJLEDDQL]RWURSQLK
rDYQLWLþHXNROLNRMHRQSUHYHOLNPRåHVHGRJRGLWLGDUDYQLDQL]RWURSLMHQHPDMXXWLFDMDQD
VWDELOQRVW NRVLQH 8 UD]PDWUDQRP VOXþDMX ]D QDJLEH DQL]RWURSQLK UDYQL YHüH RG RNR ͼ
faktor sigurnost SRþLQMHQDJORGDUDVWH
Napominjemo da je sprovedena i anali]DVWDELOQRVWLNDNRELVHXWYUGLODYHURYDWQRüDORPD

9HURYDWQRüDGDGRÿHGRORPDMH3) RE]LURPGDVHVYHNULWLþQHNOL]QHSRYUãLVDIDNWRURP
sigurnosti bliskim, ali ne i manjim RG6DSUDNWLþQRJVWDQRYLãWDYHURYDWQRüDda doÿHGR
loma nije dobar indikator.
Slika 8. Parametarska analiza za linerni anizotropni model

Figure 8. Sensitivity analysis for linear anisotropic model
Napominjemo da je naknadnim preporjektovanjem u donjem delu kosine izvedena još jedna

konstrukcija od mikrošipova, ali kako ona nema uticaj na stabilnost gornjeg dela kosine nije
X]HWDXUD]PDWUDQMHSULOLNRPSURUDþXQD
310
=$./-8ý$.
*HRORãNLPRGHOLLVSXFDOLKVWHQVNLKPDVDJRWRYRQLNDGDQLVXÄSRWSXQRWDþQL³DDQL]RWURSLMD
je gotovo uvek prisutna, pa ju je potrebno uzeti u razmatranje. Anizotropija se može razmatati
na nivou uzorka (inherentna) i na nivou stenske mase (strukturna). Može biti: naponska, po
SDUDPHWULPD þYUVWRüH GHIRUPDELOQRVWL YRGRSURSXVQosti, brzini prostiranja talasa.
Direkcioni modeli sH SULPHQMXMX X VOXþDMX NDGD VH UDYQL DQL]RWURSLMH QDOD]H QD EOLVNRP
rastojanju, tzv. „ubiquitous joints“ (npr. 10-ak cm) i ne mogu da se modeliraju diskretno.
9HüH SRMHGLQDþQH SXNRWLQH QSU UDVHGQH SRYUãL WUHED WUHWLUDWL GLVNUHWQR. Uzimanje
anizotropije u obzir u analizama stabilnosti za posledicu ima niže vrednosti faktora
sigurnosti.
LITERATURA:
Bar N., McQuillan A.: 3D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis for Anisotropic and Faulted
Rock Masses in Australian Coal and Iron Ore Mines. Proceedings of the 10th Asian Rock
Mechanics Symposium. Singapore, 2018.
Bar N., Johnson T.M., Weekes G.: Using directional shear stress models to predict slope stability in
highly anisotropic rock masses. Proceedings of the ISRM Int. Sym. EUROCK2016 (eds
Ulusay et al) Cappadocia, 2016.
Bar N., Weekes G.: Directional shear strength models in 2D and 3D limit equilibrium analyses to
assess the stability of anisotropic rock slopes in the Pilbara region of Western Australia.
Australian Geomechanics 52 (2017) 91-104.
Barton N., Bar N.: Introducing the Q-slope method and its intended use within civil and mining
engineering projects. In:Schubert W, Kluckner A (eds) Future development of rock
mechanics; Proceedings of the ISRM regional symposium, Eurock 2015 and 64th
geomechanics colloquium, Salzburg, 7–10 October 2015, 157–162.
%HULVDYOMHYLüZ.: Construction of high cuttings as a part of corridor X highway project - geotechnical
investigations, design and construction. Proceedings of the Contemporary Civil Engineering
Practice 2018, Andrevlje, 2018.
%HULVDYOMHYLF=%HULVDYOMHYLü'5DNLü'5DGLü=$SSOLFDWLRQRIgeological strength index for
characterization of weathering-LQGXFHGIDLOXUHV*5$Ĉ(9,1$5-903.
Fortisakis P., Nikas K., Marinos V., Marinos P. Anisotropic behaviour of stratified rock masses in
tunneling. Engineering geology 141-142 (2012) 74-83.
GraÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWX Beogradu: Geotechnical design report for remediation works on
cutting no. 2, on motorway E-75, km:875+505 - km: 876+240. 2016.
Ramamurthy, 1993
Sabatakakis N., i Tsiambaos G.: Anisotropy of Central Macedonian Phyllite and its effect on the
uniaxial compressive strength. Bulletin of the Public Works Research Center (1983) No. 1-2
Saroglou C., Shengwen Q., Songfeng G., Faquan W.: ARMR, a new classification system for the
rating of anisotropic rock masses. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment
78(5) (2018) 3611-3626.
Snowden: Proposal for Additional Features in SLIDE and SWEDGE, unpublished memorandum to
Rocscience, 5th April 2007.
Tsidzi K.E.N.: The influence of foliation on point load strength anisotropy of foliated rocks.
Engineering geology 29 (1990) 49-58.
311
UDK 624.152(497.11)
=$â7,7$*5$Ĉ(9,16.(-$0(6320(1,.$
STEFANU NEMANJI NA SAVSKOM TRGU U
BEOGRADU
6UÿDQ6SDVRMHYLü
CeS.Tra d.o.oo, Mekenzijeva 57/VI, Beograd,
VSDVRMHYLüBVUdjan@yahoo.com, spas@cestra.rs
REZIME
U radu je RSLVDQD JUDÿHYLQVND MDPD ]D REH]EHÿHQMH VWDELOQRVWL ERþQLK VWUDQD LVNRSD ]D
temeljenje spomenika Stefanu Nemanju, na Savskom trgu u Beogradu, u okviru projekta
%HRJUDGQDYRGL³2EH]EHÿHQMHLVNRSDVHYUãL]DãWLWQRPNRQVWUXNFLMRPRGþHOLþQLKWDOSLVD
razuporom. Temeljna jama se izvodi u sedimentnim naslagama reke Save - DOXYLMRQXDþLQH
ih prašinaste i prašinasto – peskovite gline i dobro zbijeni peskovi i šljunkovi.
./-8ý1(5(ý, REH]EHÿHQMHLVNRSDþHOLþQHWDOSHUD]XSRUDVHGLPHQWQHQDVODJHJOLQH
peskovi, šljunkovi.
EXCAVATION PIT PROTECTION OF THE

MONUMENT TO STEFAN NEMANJA ON THE
SAVA SQUARE IN BELGRADE
ABSTRACT
The paper describes a excavation pit required to ensure the stability of the sides of the
excavation for the foundation of the monument to Stefan Nemanja, on Sava Square in
Belgrade, within the project "Belgrade Waterfront". Excavation is secured by a protective
structure made of steel sheet piles and struts. The excavation pit is made in the sedimentary
– alluvion deposits of the Sava River, and comprises of silty and silty - sandy clays, and well
compacted sands and gravels.
KEY WORDS: excavation protection, steel sheet piles, struts, sedimentary deposits, clays,
sands, gravels.
UVOD
8 UDGX MH RSLVDQD JUDÿHYLQVND MDPD ]D REH]EHÿHQMH VWDELOQRVWL ERþQLK VWUDQD LVNRSD ]D
temeljenje spomenika Stefanu Nemanji, na Savskom trgu u Beogradu, a u okviru projekta
%HRJUDG QD YRGL³ 6DYVNL WUJ üH QDNRQ SODQLUDQH UHNRQVWUXNFLMH ELWL NUXåQRJ REOLND D
VDREUDüDMüHse kretati kružno (u kružnom toku)VDSHãDþNRP]RQRPXVUHGLQLWUJD Spomenik
Stefanu Nemanji je planiran na sredini Savskog trga, ispred zgrade Stare želH]QLþNHVWDQLFH
NRMDüHXEXGXüQRVWLELWLPX]HM6SRPHQLNüHELWLYLVRNP
312
.RQVWUXNFLMD WHPHOMD VSRPHQLND üH ELWL SORþD NUXåQRJ REOLND NRMD MH SURMHNWRYDQD GD VH
L]UDÿXMHRGDUPLUDQRJEHWRQD&3ORþDMHSUHþQLNDPGHEOMLQHPRVORQMHQa
QD EXãHQH ãLSRYH SUHþQLND PP GXåLQH P 'XELQD QD NRMRM MH SRWUHEQR XUDGLWL
WHPHOMHQMHVSRPHQLNDWMGXELQDQDNRMRMVHL]UDÿXMHSORþDMHDf = 5,0 m.
INŽENJERSKO – GEOLOŠKA SVOJSTVA TERENA
Da bi se utvrdio prostorni položaj i IL]LþNR - PHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYDOLWRORãNLKVUHGLQDX]RQL

spomenika, odredila dubina sloja, za potrebe celokupnog projekta izvedeno je kartiranje
terena, istražno sondiranje (SPT), i izvedene su istražne bušotine. Izvedene su ukupno dve
(2) bušotine, a iz jezgra bušotina uzet je izvestan broj uzoraka za laboratorijska ispitivanja
identifikacionih i klasifikacionih svojstava terena, i otporno - deformabilnih svojstava tla, tj.
RGUHÿLYDQMDþYUVWRüHLGHIRUPDELOQRVWLWHUHQD1DORNDFLMLREXKYDüHQRMprojektom, ukratko
VHPRJXL]GYRMLWLVOHGHüLOLWRORãNLþODQRYLSRVPDWUDMXüLQMLKRYXJHQH]XVDVWDYLVWDURVW
Nasip (n), nastao savremenim tehnogenim delovanjem. Ova nasipanja su izvedena u
ID]LL]JUDGQMHåHOH]QLþNHVWDQLFHLSULOD]QLKVDREUDüDMQLFD8SRYUãLQVNRPGHOX ga þLQH
QRVHüLVORMevi kolovoza. Dublje je nasuti materijel sastavljen od prašinasto – peskovite
- gline sa drobinom, i sa uklopcima krupnijih kamenih komada i peska. Na pojedinim
delovima nasip MHYRGR]DVLüHQLUD]PHNãDRXVOHGSRMDYHSURFHGQLKLSRG]HPnih voda.
Sedimentne naslage reke Save, aluvijon (al). Ovaj kompleks se pojavljuje u dve facije:
NRULWDLSRYRGQMD)DFLMXSRYRGQMDþLQHVXJOLQHLSRGUHÿHQRVXSHVNRYLWMSUDãLQDVWHL
prašinasto – peskovite gline (G,Pr)al. Gline su meke do VUHGQMH þYUVWH NRQ]LVWHQFLMH
(CL-CH, MI-MH), svetlo – VPHÿH, do sive boje. Faciju korita predstavljaju dobro
zbijeni sitnozrni peskovi i šljunkovi (P,Š)al.
Kompleks miocenskih sedimenata, panona i sarmata (M 2 3, M 1 3). To su lapori i
laporovite gline (M 2 3) NRMH L]JUDÿXMX SRGLQX WHUHQD WM WHUHQ LVSRG DOXYLMRQD
Laporovite gline su kompaktne i dobro konsolidovane, srednje GRþYUVWHNRQ]LVWHQFLMH
svetlo - sive, tamno - sive, i sivo - zelene boje.
Ispod lapora i laporovitih glina leže sarmatski laporoviti krHþQMDFL L RJUDQRJHQL NUHþQMDFL
SXåDUFL³ X PHÿXVREQRP VPHQMLYDQMX 0 1 3). Stenska masa je izdeljena pukotinama i
PHVWLPLþQR NDUVWLILNRYDQD 8 VWHQVNRM PDVL VX YLGOMLYi tragovi kretanje vode kroz pore i
SXNRWLQHýYUVWRüDVWHQVNHPDVHMHSURPHQOMLYDRGGHORYDVDYLVRNRPSULWLVQRPþYUVWRüRP
GRGHORYDWURãQHVWHQVNHPDVHVDQLVNRPþYUVWRüRP, tj. zona sa jako hemijski izmenjenom
stenskom masom, gde se lako drobe i lome.
Slika 1. Odnos faza i pRND]DWHOMLIL]LþNRJVWDQMDWOD na mestu spomenika

Figure 1. Phase relations and ground physical conditions indicators on the location of the monument
313
friction angle M
fricti
Slika 2. MehaniþNHRVRELQHWODQDPHVWXVSRPHQLND
Figure 2. Mechanical properties of the ground on the location of monument
2%(=%(Ĉ(1-(7(0(/-1(-$0( SPOMENIKA
Nakon sagledavanja inženjersko – JHRORãNHJUDÿHWHUHQD (Slika 1 i 2), režima podzemnih

vodaGXELQHQDNRMRMMHSRWUHEQRL]UDGLWLSORþXLãLSRYH spomenika, usvojeno je da se izvrši
REH]EHÿHQMHERþQLKVWUDQDLVNRSD]DãWLWQRPNRQVWUXNFLMRPRGþHOLþQLKWDOSL (Slika 3). Talpe
VXSURMHNWRYDQHNDRHODVWLþQDVDYLWOMLYDNRQWLQXDOQDJUDÿHYLQDVDUD]XSRURPSULYUKXSUL
þHPXVHNDRRERVWUDQLRVORQFLUD]XSLUDþDNRULVWHVDPHWDOSHZaštitna konstrukcija od talpi je
u osnovi jednostavnog - kvadratnog oblika, tj. oblikuje se zatvorena površina (prostor u
osnovi sa slobodnim prostorom od 9820 x 9900 mm). Slobodni prostor je projektovan na
QDþLQD GD SRVWRML PLQLPDOQL ]DãWLWQL L UDGQL SURVWRU QD Vvakojstrani temeljnih zidova od
800mm. 2VQRYQLQRVLYLHOHPHQWJUDÿHYQVNHMDPHXWOXVXþHOLþQLSULERML– talpe i razupora.
3URMHNWRYDQRMHSRELMDQMHþHOLþQLKWDOSLWLSD/$566(1Q Dužina talpi je L = 10,0 m.
Razupora talpi se postavlja na dubini od 0,5 P LVSRG YUKD þHOLþQH ]DãWLWH L RVLJXUDYDMX
VWDELODQRVORQDFþHOLþQLPWDOSDPD5D]XSRUDMHNUXWDLVDVWRMLVHRGKRUL]RQWDOQLKX]GXåQLK
YH]QLK þHOLþQLK JUHGD L NRVQLND WM X KRUL]RQWDOQRP VPLVOX MH UDPRYVND NRQVWUXNFLMD
5D]XSRUD L NRVQLFL VH L]UDÿXMX RG YUXüH YDOMDQLK L REOLNRYDQLK þHOLþQLK SURILOD +(%
9H]QL QRVDþL UD]XSRUH VH SRVWDYOMDMX QD NUDWNH QRVDþH SURILOH SUHWKRGQR ]DYDUHQH ]D
þHOLþQHWDOSH
Slika 3. Osnova temeljne jame na mestu razupiraþDLSRSUHþQLSUHVHN$-A

Figure 3. Ground plan of the foundation pit at the strut level and cross section A-A
314
GEOSTATIý.,3525$ý81 TEMELJNE JAME
*HRVWDWLþNLLJHRWHKQLþNL pURUDþXQþHOLþQLKUD]XSUWLKWDOSLVSURYHGHQMHQDYLãHQDþLQD
NODVLþQLP JHRWHKQLþNLP SULVWXSRP – metodom JUDQLþQH UDYQRWHåH L SULPHQRP
WHRULMHHODVWLþQRVWL– metodom reakacije tla, kao i
naponsko - deformacijski elasto–SODVWLþQLSURUDþXQ]DãWLWQHNRQVWUXNFLMHLRNROQRJ
WODQXPHULþNLPpostupkomSULPHQRPPHWRGHVDNRQDþQLPHOHPHQWLPD
.ODVLþQL JHRWHKQLþNL SULVWXS SURUDþXQD ]DãWLWQH NRQVWUXNFLMH od talpi podrazumeva: 1.

SURUDþXQVWDELOQRVWLERþQLKVWUDQDLVNRSDWODQDNRQREH]EHÿHQMDWDOSDPDSULPHQRPJUDQLþQH
UDYQRWHåHSURUDþXQVWDELOQRVWGQDWHPHOMQHMDPHQDNRQREH]EHÿHQMDWDOSDPDkao i 3.
SURUDþXQQRVLYRVWL]DãWLWQHNRQVWUXNFLMHþHOLþQLKWDOSLWHPHOMQHMDPH
3URUDþXQVWDELOQRVWLERþQLKVWUDQDLVNRSDWODL]YãHQLVXXSURJUDPX6OLGH5RFVFLHQFH
po uopštenoj Morgenstern – Price metodi (Slika 4). 3.023
1.813 3.334
2.227 2.533 4.197
Ȗ 19.5 kN/m3 ; Ȗ 19.50 kN/m3 ;

c=17 kPa; cu=30 kPa;
M=170
Ȗ 20.0 kN/m3 ; Ȗ 20.0 kN/m3 ;

c=20 kPa; cu=80 kPa;
M=190
Fs, min = 1.813 Fs, min = 3.023

Ȗ 20.0
20 0 kN/m
kN/m3 ; Ȗ 20.0 kN/m3
k
kN ;
a c=15 kPa; cu=80 kPa;
M=250
Slika 43URUDþXQVWDELOQRVWLERþQLKVWUDQDLVNRSDWODXGUHQLUDQLPLQHGUHQLUDQLPXVORYLPD
Figure 4. Stability analysis of excavation peat sides in drained and undrained conditions
3URUDþXQ VWDELOQRVW GQD WHPHOMQH MDPH L]YãHQ MH QD NODVLþDQ QDþLQQDRVQRYX LVWUDåLYDQMD
Terzaghi-ja, Bjerrum-a i Eido-a, na osnovu JUDQLþQHQRVLYRVWLWODXPHNRMJOLQL
3URUDþXQ QRVLYRVWL WDOSL L]YUãHQ MH XVYDMDMXüL SUHWSRVWDYNH R JUDQLþQLP SULWLVFLPD WOD L
JUDQLþQHUDYQRWHåH WM GD VXSRPerenja konstrukcije dovoljna tako da se razviju aktivni i
pasivni pritisci u tlu, i primene osnovnih postavki WHRULMHORNDOQLKGHIRUPDFLMDLHODVWLþQRJ
NRQWLQXXPDWMMDPDMHUD]PDWUDQDNDRHODVWLþQRRVORQMHQDJUHGD
M M M (Slika 5).
K t t =
1 nasip
2 – prašinasta i
k it li
168 5 -0 05
92 55
Ks=4000
--
2a– prašinasto i kN/m 64 881
peskovita glina kNm/ 50 0011 m
38 36
23 83
9 63
- 9 22
Slika 5. 3URUDþXQQRVLYRVWLþHOLþQLKWDOSLWHPHOMQHMDPe JUDQLþQom ravnotežom i teorijom elastiþnosti

Figure 5. Structural analysis of steel sheet piles by limit equilibrium and theory of elasticity
315
Ȗ=19.5 kN/m3
Eoed,ref= E50,ref = 5000 kPa
Eur,ref= 10000 kPa
Rf = 0.9, m=1.0
c=17 kPa; M=170
Ȗ=19.0 kN/m3
Eoed,ref= 5000 kPa
E50,ref = 6500 kPa
Eur,ref= 18000 kPa
Rf = 0.9, m=0.9,
c=20 kPa; M=190
a Ȗ=19.0 kN/m3
Eoed,ref= E50,ref = 8000 kPa a Critical SRF: 2.01
Eur,ref= 20000 kPa
Rf = 0.9, m=0.8,
c=15 kPa; M=250
a) b)
Slika 6. 3URUDþXQþHOLþQLKWDOSL0.(DUDþXQVNDSRPHUDQMD;
þXQþHOLþ D; ESURUDþXQVWDELOQRVWi
ESUR jame
Figure 6. Sheet piles analysis by FEM: a) displacment calculations; b) Excavation pit stability
Usvojeno rešenje je dalje sprovedHQR QXPHULþNRP DQDOL]RP VD NRQDþQLP HOHPHQWLPD

(MKE) u programskom paketu Phase 9.0 (Slika 6)0.(MHQXPHULþNLSRVWXSDNNRMLPVH]D
SR]QDWHJUDQLþQHLSRþHWQHXVORYHWUDåLSULEOLåQRUHãHQMHVLVWHPDSDUFLMDOQLKGLIHUHQFLMDOQLK
MHGQDþLQD'RVLVWHPDMHGQDþLQDVHGROD]LWDNRãWRVHUD]PDWUDQRSRGUXþMHQHSUHNLGQHVUHGLQH
QD SULJRGDQ QDþLQ SRGHOL QD NRQDþQH HOHPHQWH i time se formira njihova mreža. Dobijeni
VLVWHP MHGQDþLQD MH QHOLQHDUDQ SD VH NRULVWH SRVWXSFL NRML LWHUDWLYQR YRGH ND UHãHQMX WM
UHãDYDMXüL OLQHDUQL VLVWHP DOJHEDUVNLK MHGQDþLQD DSURNVLPDFLMRP, SRPRüX LQWHUSRODFLRQLK
funkcija. 2YDM]DGDWDNMHUXWLQVNLDUHãDYDQMHVLVWHPDGLIHUHQFLMDOQLKMHGQDþLQDse postiže
PDWULþQLPPHWRGDPDYUORSRJRGQLP]DNRULãüHQMHUDþXQDUD
U QDYHGQRPSURJUDPVNRPSDNHWXPRJXüHMH]DRFHQXVWDELOQRVWLJXELWNDUDYQRWHåHLVNRSD
temeljne jame, koristiti NRQFHSW XPDQMHQMD VPLþXüH þYUVWRüH WOD 665 NDGD VH RGUHÿXMH
NRHILFLMHQWNULWLþQRJQDSRQVNRJVWDQMD- SRF factor (Slika 6b).
UJUDÿLYDQMe talpi, iskop i razupiranje, SURUDþXQDWi su za ravansko stanje deformacija i sa
efektivnim parametrima tla, tj. u dreniranim uslovima. 5H]XOWDWL SURUDþXQD SRPHUDQMD L
stabilnost strana i dna jame prikazani su na Slici 6, a gɟɨVWDWLþNLKXWLFDMDi pomeranja na Slici
7.
a) b)
c))
LEM
FEM
Slika 7. 3URUDþXQþHOLþQLKWDOSL0.(DGLMDJUDPSUHVHþQLKVLOD; ESRPHUDQMHRNROQRJWODX]DOHÿX

talpi, i FSRUHÿHQMHpomeranja sa izmerenim vrednostima
Figure 7. Sheet piles analysis by FEM: a) internal forces diagram; b) ground movement in the back
and c) comparasion of deflections by other measurement data
316
=$./-8ý$.
U svim pURUDþXQima oGUHÿHQLsu neophodni podaci za procenu stabilnosti temeljne jame, kao
i stanja u njenim nosivim elementima – momenti savijanja, transverzalne sile, pomeranje
talpi, sile u UD]XSLUDþima, SRPHUDQMHLVOHJDQMHWHUHQDSRVWRMHüHJokolnog tla i objekata, itd.
UtvrÿHQRMHGDMHVtabilnost temeljne jame (u dreniranim uslovima) RGUHÿHQD0.(]D~ 11%
YHüDRGstabilnosti RGUHÿHQHQDNODVLþDQQDþLQ(Slika 4 i 5). 0DNVLPDOQLSURUDþXQVNLuticaji
momenata savijanja dobijen je u MKE, a YHüLMH]D~2% u odnosu na vrednosti dobijenih na
NODVLþDQQDþLQ(Tabela 1). Maksimalno horizontalno pomeranje je RGUHÿHQR kada su talpe
UD]PDWUDQH NDR HODVWLþQR RVORQMHQH JUHGH i iznosi 5,0 cm, tj. į + = 1 %. Horizontalno
SRPHUDQMHRGUHÿHQR0.(daje bolju prognozu. Za nekih ~55 % je manje i iznosi 2,254 cm,
tj. į+ 0,45 %0DNVLPDOQRUDþXQVNRVOHJDQMHWODX]DOHÿXWDOSLMHRNR1,30 cm.
Tabela 1. 0DNVLPDOQHUDþunske unutrašnje sile u talpama i razupori, i pomeranje talpi

Table 1. Highest calculated internal forces in sheet piles and struts, and sheet pile deflection
JUDQLþQDUDYQRWHåD metoda KE
Momenat savijanja M (kNm/m) 168,54 172,27
Transferzalane sile (razupora) Q (kN/m) 84,96 113,48
Pomeranje ɷ (cm) 5,0 2,254
LITERATURA:
Bowles, J.E.1997. Foundational analysis and design, McGraw-Hill Inter. Book Company, New York.
Long, M. 2001. Database for retaining wall and ground movements due to deep excavations. Journal
of Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering 127(3): 203-224.
Vermeer, P.A,. 1978. A double hardening model for sand, Geotechnique, 28(4), pp 413–433.
Radimpex. 2008. Tower 3d Model Builder 6.0, Radimpex, http ://www.radimpex.co.rs
Rocscience. 2010. Phase2 v9. 2D FEM program, Slide 6.0, Rocscience Inc., Toronto, Ontario.
Terzaghi, K.1955. Evaluation of coefficients of subgrade reaction., Geotechnique, vol 5, pp 297-326.
Winkler E. 1867. Die Lehre von der Elastizitat und Festigkeit, Prag Dominicus, p. 182, Berlin.
317
6WUXþQLUDG
UDK 624.152(497.11)
TEHNOLOGIJA ISKOPA I ZAŠTITA

*5$Ĉ(9,16.(-$0(=$3275(%(
IZGRADNJE HOTELA „SPLENDOR“ U
951-$ý.2-%$1-,
,YDQ9DVLü0DNVLP-RYDQRYLü
“Graditelj NS”, Novi Sad
ivan.vasic@graditelj-ns.co.rs ; maksim.jovanovic@graditelj-ns.co.rs
REZIME
U radu je prikD]DQD ]DãWLWD JUDÿHYLQVNH MDPH SULPHQRP montažne AB konstrukcije tip
„GRADITELJ NS“ VD WHKQRORJLMRP L]YRÿHQMD NRMD MH SULODJRÿDYDQD XVORYLPD QD WHUHQX.
Projektovana konstrukcija je pretrpela izvesne izmene prouzrokovane obilnim padavinama i
narušavanjem lokalne stabilnosti bokova JUDÿHYLQVNHjame. Zaštitna konstrukcija se sastoji
od prefabrikovanih AB elemenata koji se na licu mesta postavljaju i monolitizuju.
./-8ý1(5(ý,zaštita konstrukcija, WHKQRORJLMDL]YRÿHQMD, vremenske neprilike
THE TECHNOLOGY OF EXCAVATION AND PIT

SHORING FOR TNE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
HOTEL SPLENDOR IN VRNJACKA BANJA
ABSTRACT
The following case study is to present the technology of pit shoring by the usage of
prefabricated RC construction and techology which is adapted to the field conditions. The
designed structure had changes caused by heavy rain and damage to the local stability of the
sides of the construction pit. The construction consists of prefabricated RC elements that are
assemled and monolithed at the specific site.
KEY WORDS: shoring of the pit, construction technology, weather conditions
UVOD
Na uglu ulica Proleterskih brigada i 1. maja X 9UQMDþNRM %DQML SURMHNWRYDQ MH L L]JUDÿHQ
objekat hotela “SPLENDOR”. Objekat je UD]XÿHQHRVQRYHSRYUãLQHXRVQRYLFFDP2.
Spratnost objekta je Po+Su+P+2(3) i Po+Su+P+1+P. Objekat je fundiran na AB temeljnoj
SORþLG FPLVORMXWDPSRQãOMXQNDGHEOMLQHFPDubina iskopa sa gornje-brdske strane
je iznosila cca 8,0m, dok je sa donje-padinske strane bila cca 4,80m. Sa padinske strane
318
iskopa VXVXVHGQLREMHNWLDVDERþQHLEUGVNHVWUDQHVXSRVWRMHüHVDREUDüDMQLFHVDSUDWHüLP
instalacijama. =DGDWDNSURMHNWRJUHãHQMDMHELRGDVHSRãWXMXüLXVORYHGDWH*HRPHKDQLþNLP
HODERUDWRP ]D SUHGPHWQX ORNDFLMX REH]EHGL ORNDOQD VWDELOQRVW ERNRYD JUDÿHYLQVNH MDPH
Projektnim rešenjem zaštite JUDÿHYLQVNH MDPH MH SUHGYLÿHQD PRQWDåQD $% ]DãWLWQD
konstrukcija tip “GRADITELJ NS” koja se na licu mesta monolitizuje u jedinstvenu
konstruktivnu celinu. Dispozicija zaštitne konstrukcije data je na slici br. 1. U zavisnosti od
dubine iskopa projektovana su dva tipa zaštitne konstrukcije þLMLVXNDUDNWHULVWLþQLpreseci
dati na slici br. 2. Konstrukcija tip-1 je visine 5,50m i tip-2 visine 4,15m. Dimenzije stope
kontrafora tip-1 su 3,50x0,80x0,80m, a kontrafora tip-2 su 2,30x0,80x0,60m. Ukupna dužina
zaštitne konstrukciMHMHPRGþHJDMHWLS-1 l=94,0m, a tip-2 l=91,0m. Radovi na zaštiti
JUDÿHYLQVNHMDPHVXVHL]YRGLOLXSHULRGXMXO-avgust 2018. godine.
238.50
ja
1.ma
uli ca
ul.Prol eterskih bri gada

230.60
235.50
Slika 1. Dispozicija zaštitne konstrukcije

Figure 1. The shoring scheme
319
Zaštitna konstrukcija Zaštitna konstrukcija

tip-2 tip-1
±0.00
238.5
nasip
235.44
prašinaste gline,
laporovite gline
40
234.14
35
500
231.40 231.40
370
odlomci breèa i
tufovi, tufiti,
10
10
pešèara
170 60 230.60
230 230.00 100 250
350
Slika 2. Preseci zaštitne konstrukcije, tip-1 i tip-2

Figure 2. Cross section of construction, type-1 and type-2
PROJEKTOVANA TEHNOLOGIJA ,=92Ĉ(1-$=$â7,71(

KONSTRUKCIJE
3UHSRþHWNDUDGRYDQDWHUHQXSURL]YHGHQLVX$%HOHPHQWLXSRJRQX]DSUHIDEULNDFLMXLNDGD
VXGRYROMQRRGOHåDOLWUDQVSRUWRYDQLVXQDJUDGLOLãWH5DGRYLQDLVNRSXL]DãWLWDJUDÿHYLQVNH
MDPHRGYLMDOLVXVHXVOHGHüLPID]DPD
- FAZA I - Iskop prve faze širokog otkop na kotu 234,0mnm,
- FAZA II – Iskop jama za kontrafore i montaža kontrafora
- FAZA III – Montaža AB platana L]PHÿXNRQWUDIRUD
- FAZA IV – Izrada horizontalne AB vezne grede
- FAZA V – Iskop druge faze širokog otkopa na projektovanu kotu sa izradom ãOMXQþDQRJ
tampona.
I FAZA - Široki otkop na kotu 234,00 mnm

237.00 proseèna kota 236.50
236.00
1
1:
235.00
234.00
233.00
Slika 3. Faza I
Figure 3. Phase I
320
II FAZA - Iskop jama za kontrafore i montaža kontrafora

237.00 proseèna kota 2 36.50 proseèna kota 236.50
236.00
1
1:
235.00 metalne talpe sa
razupiraèima
234.00
233.00
232.00
231.00
230.00
350 350
80
236.50
233.00
300
220
350
80
III FAZA - Monta ža AB platana izmeðu kontrafora IV FAZA - Izrada horizontalne AB grede
237.00 2 36.50 2 36.50
proseèna kota proseèna kota
236.00
235.00
234.00 AB ploèa - talpa 2
233.00
AB ploèa - talpa 1
232.00
231.00
230.00
350
237.00 V FAZA - Iskop druge faze na projektovanu kotu
236.00
235.00
234.00
233.00
232.00
231.00
230.00
Slika 4. Faze II-V
Figure 4. Phase from II to V
321
IZMENJENA TEHNOLOGIJA IZVOĈENJA ZAŠTITNE KONSTRUKCIJE
Projektovanom tehnologijom je bilo predviÿeno da se zaštitna konstrukcija radi sa padinske

strane ka brdskoj. 8 ID]L L]YRÿHQMD ]DãWLWQH NRQVWUXNFLMH sa padinske strane i do ulice
Proleterskih brigada došlo je GRSODYOMHQMDJUDÿHYLVQNHMDPHXVOHGobilnih padavina. Velike
NROLþLQHYRGH su se VDKLSVRPHWULMVNLYLVRþLMHJterena slile XJUDÿHYLQVNXMDPXEH]RE]LUãWR
MH SDG ERþQH XOLFH QD VXSURWQX VWUDQX 7RP SULOLNRP MH ugrožena stabilnost zaštitne
NRQVWUXNFLMH SD MH RGOXþHQR GD VH QDVWDYH UDGRYL QD L]YRÿHQMX ]DãWLWQH konstrukcije uz
dodatno osiguranje razupiranjem2YDL]PHQDMH]DKWHYDODGDVHLVNRSJUDÿHYLQVNHMDPHL
EHWRQLUDQMH WHPHOMQH SORþH YUãL X WUL HWDSH VOLND D QH X FHORVWL NDNR MH SURMHNWRYDQR.
1DUHGQD HWDSD ]DãWLWH JUDÿHYLQVNH MDPH L LVNRSD MH YUãHQD WHN QDNRQ ]DYUãHWND SUHWKRdne
etape.
238.50
ja
1.ma
ulica
229.54 K.I.
III etapa
230.60 K.I.
232.79 K.I.
K.I.
229.54 K.I.
ul.Proleterskih brigada
230.79
II etapa
I etapa
230.60 K.I.
228.84 K.I.
235.50
Slika 5. Etape iskopa

Fugire 5. Phases of excavation
Razupiranje zaštitne konstrukcije u sve tri etape iskopa je vršeno u uglovima i do ulice
Proleterskih brigada.
322
I etapa
ra
zu
230.60 K.I.
pi
ra
è
228.84 K.I.
èel. greda
ra
zu
pi
è
ra
ra
è
pi
zu
ra
Slika 6. Etapa I iskopa
Figure 6. Phase I of excavation
229.54 K.I.
Ra
230.60 K.I.
zu
pir
aè
229.54 K.I.
Raz
upi
II etapa
raè
I etapa
Razupiraè
230.60 K.I.
2x I 240
aè
p ir
zu
Ra
Slika 7. Etapa II iskopa

Figure 7. Phase II of excavation
323
ja
1 .m a
u lica
Ra
zu
pir
aè
229.54 K.I.
III etapa
Razupiraè
2x I 240
232.79 K.I.
K.I.
.60
K.I.
230
229.54 K.I.
230.79
II etapa
I etapa
Slika 8. Etapa III iskopa

Figure 8. Phase III of excavation
Slika 9. Fotografija etape I iskopa

Figure 9. Photograpfy of the phase I of excavation
324
Slika 10. Fotografija etape II iskopa

Figure 10. Photograpfy of the phase II of excavation
=$./-8ý$.
Konstrukcija tip “GRADITELJ NS” ima niz prednosti u odnosu na druge sisteme zaštite
JUDÿHYLQVNH MDPH Jednostavna je za montažu, ne zahteva preveliku mehanizaciju tokom
njene izrade i QHXSRUHGLYR MH HNRQRPLþnija od ostalih tipova podgrade7RNRP L]YRÿHQMD
radova na zaštitnoj konstrukciji PRJXüD VX UHODWLYQR MHGQRVWDYQD UHãHQMD SULODJRÿDYDQMD
projektovane zaštitne konstrukcije lokalnim uslovima na terenu, kao što je bilo u ovom
VOXþDMX =DãWLWQDNRQVWUXNFLMDWLS³*5$',7(/-16´VHODNRSULODJRÿDYDXVORYLPDQDWHUHQX
LHYHQWXDOQLPL]PHQDPDSRWUHEL]DGRGDWQLPUD]XSLUDQMHPLVOLþQR
LITERATURA:
[1] M. Jovanoviü.; M. Hrnjak; “Zaštita graÿevinske jame-neka praktiþna iskustva”, str. 253-258,
Zbornik radova sa drugog nauþno-struþnog savetovanja “Geotehniþki aspekti graÿevinarstva”
Soko Banja 2007.
[2] M. Jovanoviü,9DVLüÄ7HKQRORJLMDLVNRSDL]DãWLWHGXERNHJUDÿHYLQVNHMDPH]DYLQVNLSRGUXP
u Sremskim Karlovcima”, str. 249-254, Zbornik radova sa þetvrtog nauþno-struþnog savetovanja
“Geotehniþki aspekti graÿevinarstva” Zlatibor 2011.
[3] ,9DVLü M. Jovanoviü; D. Jevtiü11LQNRYLü Ä=DãWLWDJUDÿHYLQVNHMDPHNRQVWUXNFLMRPWLS
GRADITELJ NS sa snižavanjem NPV QDORNDFLMLQDXþQR-tehnološkog-parka u Novom Sadu”, str.
447-454, Zbornik radova sedmog nauþno-struþnog PHÿXQDURGQRJsavetovanja “Geotehniþki
aspekti graÿevinarstva” Šabac 2017.
[4] Geotehniþki elaborat za potrebe izgradnje hotela „Splendor“, broj elaborata 148-12/2017,
Geofizika-ing, Beograd
325
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.137.5
ɉɊɂɆȿɇȺɉɈɌɉɈɊɇɂɏɄɈɇɋɌɊɍɄɐɂȳȺɁȺ
ɋȺɇȺɐɂȳɍɄɅɂɁɂɒɌȺɍɈɄȼɂɊɍɂɁɊȺȾȿ
ɉɊɈȳȿɄȺɌȺɉɈȻɈȴɒȺȵȺ
ɆȺȽɂɋɌɊȺɅɇɂɏɂɊȿȽɂɈɇȺɅɇɂɏ
ɉɍɌȿȼȺɋɊȻɂȳȿ
ɆɚɪɢʁɚɄɪɫɬɢʄɇɢɤɨɥɚȻɨɠɨɜɢʄɆɢɪʁɚɧɚɀɢɜɚɧɨɜɢʄ
ȳɚɞɪɚɧɤɚɆɢɥɢʄ
ɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɂɆɋȻɭɥɟɜɚɪɜɨʁɜɨɞɟɆɢɲɢʄɚȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ
marija.krstic@institutims.rs
ɊȿɁɂɆȿ
ɍ ɪɚɞɭ ɫɟ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɭʁɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɚ ɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚ ɧɚ ɦɚɝɢɫɬɪɚɥɧɨʁ ɦɪɟɠɢ ɋɪɛɢʁɟ Ɉɛɪɚɻɟɧɚ ɫɭ
ɱɟɬɢɪɢ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɚ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ ɨɞ ɱɟɝɚ ʁɟ ɤɨɞ ɞɜɚ ɩɪɢɦɟʃɟɧɚ ɦɟɬɨɞɚ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ ɞɭɛɨɤɨɝ
ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚʃɚɨɞɧɨɫɧɨɲɢɩɨɜɚɭɬɪɟʄɟɦɩɪɢɦɟɪɭɡɚɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɭɫɟɩɪɢɦɟʃɭʁɟȺȻɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢ
ɡɢɞɞɨɤɫɟɭɱɟɬɜɪɬɨɦɫɥɭɱɚʁɭɡɚɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɭɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɤɨɪɢɫɬɢɡɢɞɨɞɝɚɛɢɨɧɚɂɫɬɪɚɠɧɟ
ɪɚɞɨɜɟɢɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɢɡɪɚɞɢɨʁɟɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɂɆɋɢɡȻɟɨɝɪɚɞɚɬɨɤɨɦɝɨɞɢɧɟ
ɄȴɍɑɇȿɊȿɑɂɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɚɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɚɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ
USAGE OF SUPPORT STRUCTURES FOR

LANDSCAPE REPAIRS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
OF SERBIAN MAIN AND REGIONAL ROAD
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
ABSTRACT
This paper presents landslide repair on the main road network of Serbia. Four repair projects
were processed, of which two were deep-foundation ie piles, in the third case the AB retaining
wall was applied, while in the fourth case, a gabion wall was used to repair the landslide.
Investigation works and repair projects were made by the IMS Institute in Belgrade during
2018.
KEY WORDS: landslide, sanation, support structures
ɍȼɈȾ
ɂɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɚ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɬɥɚ ɢ ɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ ʁɟ ɱɟɫɬɚ ɩɪɟɨɤɭɩɚɰɢʁɚ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɫɬɪɭɱʃɚɤɚ ɭ

ɦɨɞɟɪɧɨ ɜɪɟɦɟ ɇɚɪɨɱɢɬɨ ɢɧɬɟɪɟɫɨɜɚʃɟ ɫɬɪɭɱʃɚɤɚ ʁɚɜʂɚ ɫɟ ɡɚ ɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɨ ɞɟʁɫɬɜɨ
326
ɢɡɦɟɻɭɬɥɚɢɝɪɚɻɟɜɢɧɫɤɨɝɨɛʁɟɤɬɚɤɨɞɫɥɨɠɟɧɢɯɝɪɚɻɟɜɢɧɫɤɢɯɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚɦɟɻɭɤɨʁɟ
ɫɩɚɞɚʁɭɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢɨɛʁɟɤɬɢ
ɉɨɬɩɨɪɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɞɟɥɟɫɟɝɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɨɧɚɩɥɢɬɤɨɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɧɟɢɞɭɛɨɤɨɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɧɟ
ɂɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɚ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɬɥɚ ɢ ɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɲɟ ɫɟ ɫɚ ɝɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɫɤɨɝ ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɨɝ ɢ
ɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɨɝɚɫɩɟɤɬɚɋɚɝɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɫɤɟɫɬɪɚɧɟɫɚɞɟʁɫɬɜɨɬɟɪɟɧɚɢɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ
ɭɦɧɨɝɨɦɟ ɡɚɜɢɫɢ ɨɞ ɨɛɥɢɤɚ ɢ ɤɨɧɮɢɝɭɪɚɰɢʁɟ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ Ƚɟɨɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢ
ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɬɥɚɫɭʁɟɞɚɧɨɞɛɢɬɧɢɯɮɚɤɬɨɪɚɡɚɭɫɜɚʁɚʃɟɬɢɩɚɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɡɚ
ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɭ ɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚ ɇɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɚ ɩɨɫɬɚɜɤɚ ɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɟ ɡɧɚɱɢ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɟ ɧɚɩɨɧɚ ɢ
ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɞɨɡɨɧɟɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɨɝɞɟʁɫɬɜɚɭɬɥɭɢɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨʁɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɢ
ɍɨɜɨɦɪɚɞɭɛɢʄɟɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɨɬɪɢɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɚɧɚɱɢɧɚɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɊɚɡɦɚɬɪɚʄɟɫɟ
ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɨɞ ɝɚɛɢɨɧɚ ɚɪɦɢɪɚɧɨ ɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɢ ɡɢɞ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɨɞ
ɲɢɩɨɜɚɢɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝȺȻɡɢɞɚ.
Ɍɨɤɨɦɝɨɞɢɧɟɧɚɦɚɝɢɫɬɪɚɥɧɨʁɦɪɟɠɢɋɪɛɢʁɟɞɨɲɥɨʁɟɞɨɮɨɪɦɢɪɚʃɚɨɲɬɟʄɟʃɚ
ɧɚɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɭɤɨʁɚɫɭɭɡɪɨɤɨɜɚɧɚɩɨʁɚɜɨɦɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟ ɧɚɫɢɩɚɬɪɭɩɚ ɩɭɬɚɢ ɤɥɢɡɚʃɟɦ
ɤɨɫɢɧɟ ɭɫɟɤɚ Ɉɜɟ ɩɨʁɚɜɟ ɞɨɜɟɥɟ ɫɭ ɞɨ ɨɬɟɠɚɧɨɝ ɨɞɜɢʁɚʃɚ ɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɚ ɩɚ ʁɟ ɡɛɨɝ
ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚɛɟɡɛɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɛɢɥɨɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɨɫɚɧɢɪɚɬɢɨɜɟɞɟɨɧɢɰɟɁɚɩɨɬɪɟɛɟɂɧɜɟɫɬɢɬɨɪɚ
ɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬ ɂɆɋ ʁɟ ɢɡɜɪɲɢɨ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɢ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɨ
ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɟɦɨɞɟɥɟɬɟɪɟɧɚɢɭɪɚɞɢɨɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ
ɄɅɂɁɂɒɌȿ³ȻɍɒɂɇɋɄɈɉɈȴȿ´
ɇɚɞɪɠɚɜɧɨɦɩɭɬɭ IIA-172ɞɟɨɧɢɰɚɛɪ17201, ȻɚʁɢɧɚȻɚɲɬɚɉɟɪɭʄɚɰ– ɉɟɪɭʄɚɰkm

2+450,00 ɪɟɝɢɫɬɪɨɜɚɧɨʁɟ ɨɲɬɟʄɟʃɟɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɚɢɧɚɫɢɩɚɬɪɭɩɚɩɭɬɚɤɨʁɟ ʁɟɡɚɯɜɚɬɢɥɚ ɨɛɟ
ɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɧɟɬɪɚɤɟɭɞɭɠɢɧɢɨɞa 60m.
ɋɚ ɥɟɜɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɩɭɬɚ ɫɦɟɪ ɤɚ ɉɟɪɭʄɰɭ ʁɟ ɜɪɥɨ ɫɬɪɦɚ ɤɨɫɢɧɚ ɡɚɫɟɤɚ ɧɚɝɢɛɚ ~ 1:1,
ɜɢɫɢɧɟ ɨɤɨ a P ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɭ ɲɤɪɢʂɚɜɨʁ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɨʁ ɦɚɫɢ ɫɚ ɪɟɥɚɬɢɜɧɨ ɬɚɧɤɨɦ ɤɨɪɨɦ
ɪɚɫɩɚɞɢɧɟɩɨɲɭɦʂɟɧɚɢɭɫɚɞɚɲʃɢɦɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚɫɬɚɛɢɥɧɚ ɍɧɨɠɢɰɢɤɨɫɢɧɟɡɚɫɟɤɚ
ɧɟɩɨɫɪɟɞɧɨɭɡ ɞɪɟɧɚɠɧɨɨɞɜɨɞɧɢɤɚɧɚɥɩɨɫɬɨʁɢɫɬɚɪɢɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢ ɡɢɞ ɜɢɫɢɧɟɨɤɨ
– 1.00 m. ɇɚ ɞɟɥɭ ɡɢɞɚ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ ɧɚɥɚɡɢ ɭ ɡɨɧɢ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ ɧɚ ɩɭɬɭ ɭɨɱɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɛɥɚɝɨ
ɪɚɡɦɢɰɚʃɟ ɤɚɦɩɚɞɚ ɇɢɡɛɪɞɧɚ ɤɨɫɢɧɚ – ɩɚɞɢɧɚ ɫɚ ɞɟɫɧɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɩɭɬɚ ɫɦɟɪ ɤɚ
ɉɟɪɭʄɰɭɩɪɟɦɚɪɟɰɢȾɪɢɧɢʁɟɜɪɥɨɫɬɪɦɚɧɚɝɢɛɚ~ 1:1, ɜɢɫɢɧɟ! mɩɨɲɭɦʂɟɧɚ
ɢɨɛɪɚɫɥɚɝɭɫɬɢɦɪɚɫɬɢʃɟɦ
Ƚɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɦɨɞɟɥɬɟɪɟɧɚ
ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɭɤɭɩɧɨ 4 ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ ɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɚɱɟɧɟ ɞɭɛɢɧɟ ɨɞ ~ 7-12 mɩɪɢɱɟɦɭ

ʁɟ ɞɭɛɢɧɚ ɛɭɲɟʃɚ ɛɢɥɚ ɭɫɥɨɜʂɟɧɚ ɭɥɚɫɤɨɦ ɭ ɱɜɪɫɬɭ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɭ ɦɚɫɭ ɫɚ ɨɬɩɨɪɨɦ ɩɪɢ
ɛɭɲɟʃɭ
Ʉɨɥɨɜɨɡɧɚ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɨɞ ɜɢɲɟ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ ɚɫɮɚɥɬɚ ɤɚɨ ɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚ
ɞɭɝɨɝɨɞɢɲʃɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɞɟɨɧɢɰɟɩɪɟɚɫɮɚɥɬɢɪɚʃɟɦɧɨɜɢɦɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚ
Ɍɟɪɟɧɭɤɨɦɟʁɟɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɟɮɨɪɦɢɪɚɧɨɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧʁɟɨɞɫɟɞɢɦɟɧɚɬɚɩɚɥɟɨɡɨɢɤɚ– ɤɚɪɛɨɧɚ
Ⱦɭɠ ɩɪɫɥɢɧɚ ɢ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɞɭɠ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚ ɲɤɪɢʂɚɜɨɫɬɢ ɞɨɥɚɡɢ ɞɨ ɥɚɤɨɝ
ɩɪɨɞɢɪɚʃɚɜɥɚɝɟ– ɜɨɞɟɤɚɨɨɫɧɨɜɧɨɝɚɝɟɧɫɚʃɢɯɨɜɟɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ– ɯɟɦɢʁɫɤɟ ɢɡɦɟʃɟɧɨɫɬɢ
ɞɟɝɪɚɞɚɰɢʁɟ ɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ ɪɚɫɩɚɞɚʃɚ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɉɨɜɥɚɬɧɢ ɞɟɨ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ʁɟ ɢɡɦɟʃɟɧ
ɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ – ɯɟɦɢʁɫɤɢ ɞɟɝɪɚɞɢɪɚɧ ɢɫɩɭɰɚɨ ɢ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ ɡɨɧɚɪɧɨ ɪɚɡɦɟɤɲɚɥɭ ɡɨɧɭ
327
ɲɤɪɢʂɚɰɚɫɦɟɻɟ- ɬɚɦɧɨɫɦɟɻɟɞɨɫɢɜɟɛɨʁɟɥɨɤɚɥɧɨ ɭɩɪɨɫɥɨʁɚɜɚʃɭɫɚɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɢɦ

ɝɥɢɧɚɦɚ ɩɪɨɦɟɧʂɢɜɟɡɛɢʁɟɧɨɫɬɢɢɱɜɪɫɬɨʄɟ.
ɋɥɢɤɚ 1. ɉɪɢɤɚɡ ɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟ ɧɚ ɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɭ ɩɪɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ-ɭɝɪɨɠɟɧɢ ɩɭɬɧɢ ɩɪɚɜɚɰ

Figure 1. Roadway crack pre - sanation - endangered road
Ɇɟɪɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ
ɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɪɟɤɨɝɧɨɫɰɢɪɚʃɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɟɫɭɫɥɟɞɟʄɟɫɚɧɚɰɢɨɧɟɦɟɪɟ
- ɢɡɪɚɞɚȺȻɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝɡɢɞɚɤɨʁɢʁɟɭɞɚʂɟɧcm ɨɞɞɟɫɧɟɢɜɢɰɟɩɭɬɚ
- ɢɡɪɚɞɚɞɪɟɧɚɠɧɟɢɫɩɭɧɟɢɡɚɡɢɞɚ
- ɪɟɝɭɥɚɰɢʁɚɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɢɯɜɨɞɚ
- ɪɟɝɭɥɚɰɢʁɚɚɬɦɨɫɮɟɪɫɤɢɯɜɨɞɚ
ȺȻɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢɡɢɞʁɟɭɤɭɩɧɟɞɭɠɢɧɟm ɢɫɚɫɬɚɜʂɟɧʁɟɢɡɤɚɦɩɚɞɚ
Ⱦɪɟɧɚɠɧɚ ɢɫɩɭɧɚ ɢɡɚ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝ ɡɢɞɚ ɢɦɚ ɡɚ ɰɢʂ ɫɩɪɟɱɚɜɚʃɟ ɧɟɤɨɧɬɪɨɥɢɫɚɧɨɝ
ɩɪɨɰɟɻɢɜɚʃɚɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɢɯɜɨɞɚɤɪɨɡɬɟɥɨɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɢɢɡɚɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝɡɢɞɚ
ɍɰɢʂɭɫɢɝɭɪɧɟɢɛɪɡɟɟɜɚɤɭɚɰɢʁɟɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɟɜɨɞɟɤɨʁɚɫɟɫɥɢɜɚɫɚɭɡɛɪɞɧɟɤɨɫɢɧɟɤɚ
ɩɭɬɭɢɡɜɨɞɢɫɟɚɫɮɚɥɬɧɢɪɢɝɨɥɢɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɚɫɟɜɢɫɨɤɢɢɜɢɱʃɚɤɫɚɥɟɜɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟɩɭɬɚ ɢ
ɢɡɜɨɞɢɫɟɚɫɮɚɥɬɧɢɪɢɝɨɥɤɪɚʁȺȻɡɢɞɚɫɚɞɟɫɧɟɫɬɪɚɧɟɩɭɬɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɨɩɪɟɱɧɢɩɪɟɫɟɤɬɟɪɟɧɚɫɚɫɚɧɚɰɢɨɧɢɦɦɟɪɚɦɚ
Figure 2. Cross section of terrain with remedial measures
328
ɄɅɂɁɂɒɌȿÄɉɊȿȽɈɊȿɅɂɐȺ´
Ⱦɪɠɚɜɧɢ ɩɭɬ ,ȼ – ɧɚ ɞɟɥɭ ɞɟɨɧɢɰɟ .ɪɚʂɟɜɨ ȳɚɪɱɭʁɚɤ – Ɇɚɬɚɪɭɲɤɚ Ȼɚʃɚ NP
ɞɨ NP ʁɟ ɧɚɤɨɧ ɜɟɥɢɤɢɯ ɩɚɞɚɜɢɧɚ ɢ ɛɭʁɢɱɧɢɯ ɩɨɩɥɚɜɚ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɭ
ɡɚɞɟɫɢɥɟ ɋɪɛɢʁɭ ɭ ɩɟɪɢɨɞɭ ɚɩɪɢɥ-ɦɚʁ ɝɨɞɢɧɟ ɨɲɬɟʄɟɧ ɞɨɲɥɨ ʁɟ ɞɨ ɩɨʁɚɜɟ
ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɧɚɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɭɤɨʁɟɫɭɡɚɯɜɚɬɢɥɟɨɛɟɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɧɟɬɪɚɤɟɉɪɨɰɟɫɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ
- ɤɥɢɡɚʃɚɫɟɦɚɧɢɮɟɫɬɨɜɚɨɭɜɢɞɭɧɟɤɨɥɢɤɨɨɬɜɨɪɟɧɢɯɧɟɩɪɚɜɢɥɧɢɯɥɭɱɧɢɯɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɚ
ɲɢɪɢɧɟɞɨ-3 cm ɫɚɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɦɞɟɧɢɜɟɥɚɰɢʁɨɦɭɡɨɧɢɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɟɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟɨɤɨ-5 cm.
ɋɥɢɤɚɂɡɝɥɟɞɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚ
ɉɪɨɝɨɪɟɥɢɰɚ
Figure 3. Landslide layout '' Progorelica 2 ''

ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɭɤɭɩɧɨ 4 ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟ. Ȼɭɲɟʃɟɦ ɤɪɨɡ ɤɨɥɨɜɨɡ ɭɬɜɪɻɟɧɚ ɫɭ 2-3 ɫɥɨʁɚ
ɚɫɮɚɥɬɚ ɭ ɭɤɭɩɧɨʁ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɢ ɨɞ 25 cm. ɍ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚ Ȼ3 ɢ Ȼ4 ɢɫɩɨɞ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ ɚɫɮɚɥɬɚ,
ɭɬɜɪɻɟɧ ʁɟ ɫɥɨʁ ɧɚɥɢɤ ɫɬɪɭɝɚɧɨɦ ɚɫɮɚɥɬɭ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɟ 20 – 25 cm.
ɋɥɨʁ ɧɟɜɟɡɚɧɨɝ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ – ɬɚɦɩɨɧ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɟ -30 cm ɱɢɧɢ ɦɟɲɚɜɢɧɚ ɬɭɰɚɧɢɤɚ
ɝɪɚɧɭɥɚɰɢʁɟ-ɢɥɢ-63.
ɂɫɩɨɞɨɜɨɝɫɥɨʁɚɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟɨɞ– 1,7 m ɢɫɩɨɞɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɚɡɚɫɬɭɩʂɟɧɢɫɭ
ɧɟɜɟɡɚɧɢ ɢ ɩɨɥɭɜɟɡɚɧɢ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɢ – ɡɚɝɥɢʃɟɧɢ ɬɭɰɚɧɢɤ ɢ ɲʂɭɧɚɤ ɫɚ ɭɬɢɫɧɭɬɨɦ
ɤɚɦɟɧɨɦɤɚɥɞɪɦɨɦɭɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɭɩɨɫɬɟʂɢɰɭ– ɨɫɬɚɰɢɩɪɜɨɛɢɬɧɨɝɩɭɬɚ
ɉɨɫɬɟʂɢɱɧɢɫɥɨʁ- ɡɚɜɪɲɧɢɫɥɨʁɧɚɫɢɩɚɤɚɨɢɧɢɠɢɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɧɚɫɢɩɚɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟɨɞm,
ɢɫɩɨɞɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɚɢɡɪɚɻɟɧɢɫɭɨɞɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨ– ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɟɝɥɢɧɟɬɚɦɧɨɫɦɟɻɟ
ɛɨʁɟɩɨɥɭɬɜɪɞɟɤɨɧɡɢɫɬɟɧɰɢʁɟɢɜɢɫɨɤɟɩɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢCHɍɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚɦɚȻɢȻɭ
ɨɫɧɨɜɢɧɚɫɢɩɚɢɡɞɜɨʁɟɧʁɟɫɥɨʁɯɭɦɢɮɢɰɢɪɚɧɟɝɥɢɧɟɞɟɛʂɢɧɟcca 30 cm.
Ɇɟɪɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ
ɇɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚ ɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɤɚɨ ɩɪɢɦɚɪɧɨ ɪɟɲɟʃɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ
ɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚ ɞɭɛɨɤɨ ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɧɚ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɨɞ ɛɭɲɟɧɢɯ ȺȻ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɩɨɜɟɡɚɧɢɯ ȺȻ
ɝɪɟɞɨɦɩɨɪɟɞɥɟɜɟɛɚɧɤɢɧɟɩɭɬɚɢɡɚɦɟɧɚɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɭɬɪɭɩɭɩɭɬɚɞɟɛʂɢɧɟɫɥɨʁɚɨɞ
2mɞɪɟɧɚɠɧɢɦɧɚɫɢɩɨɦɨɞɤɚɦɟɧɟɫɢɬɧɟɠɢ
ɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɯɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɨʁɟɪɟɲɟʃɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɧɚɫɢɩɚɬɪɭɩɚɩɭɬɚ
ɤɨʁɟɨɛɭɯɜɚɬɚɡɚɦɟɧɭɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɭɬɪɭɩɭɩɭɬɚ
329
ɍ ɞɪɭɝɨʁ ɮɚɡɢ ɪɚɞɨɜɚ ɧɚ ɩɚɞɢɧɢ ɫɚ ɞɟɫɧɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɩɭɬɚ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɢɡɪɚɞɢɬɢ ȺȻ ɬɪɚɩɟɡɧɟ
ɤɚɧɚɥɟɄɢɄoɜɢɤɚɧɚɥɢɬɪɟɛɚɞɚɨɦɨɝɭʄɟɩɪɢɯɜɚɬɢɨɞɜɨɞɜɨɞɟɫɚɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɬɟɪɟɧɚ
ɤɚɤɨɛɢɫɟɲɬɨʁɟɦɨɝɭʄɟɜɢɲɟɫɦɚʃɢɨɞɨɬɢɰɚʁɜɨɞɟɭɡɨɧɢɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɢɤɨɥɢɱɢɧɚɜɭɱɟɧɨɝ
ɧɚɧɨɫɚɤɨʁɚɫɚɤɨɫɢɧɟɢɡɧɚɞɩɭɬɚɞɨɫɩɟɜɚɧɚɤɨɥɨɜɨɡ
ɄɅɂɁɂɒɌȿÄɊȺɄɈȼȺȻȺɊȺ´
ɇɚɞɪɠɚɜɧɨɦɩɭɬɭIIB-376, ɞɟɨɧɢɰɚɛɪɆɢɥɟɲɟɜɨ- Ɍɭɪɢʁɚɤɦɞɨɲɥɨ

ʁɟ ɞɨ ɩɪɜɢɯ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ – ɤɥɢɡɚʃɚ ɭ ɞɟɫɧɨʁ ɤɨɫɢɧɢ ɩɚɞɢɧɟ ɩɪɟ ɞɟɫɟɬɚɤ ɝɨɞɢɧɚ
Ⱦɟɬɚʂɧɢɦɩɪɟɝɥɟɞɨɦɬɟɪɟɧɚɭɬɜɪɻɟɧɨʁɟɞɚʁɟɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɟɭɧɨɠɢɰɢɞɟɫɧɟɤɨɫɢɧɟɡɚɫɟɤɚ
ɲɢɪɢɧɟ ɨɤɨ m ɩɨ ɩɭɬɭ ɢ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ ɨɞ ɱɟɨɧɨɝ ɨɠɢʂɤɚ ɞɨ ɧɨɠɢɰɟ ɨɤɨ m Ɍɟɥɨ
ɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɢɦɚɢɡɞɭɠɟɧ³ʁɟɡɢɱɚɫɬ´ɨɛɥɢɤɫɚɩɪɨɫɟɱɧɨɦɲɢɪɢɧɨɦɭɫɪɟɞɢɲʃɟɦɞɟɥɭɨɤɨ
25 mȾɟɛʂɢɧɚɩɨɤɪɟɧɭɬɟɦɚɫɟʁɟ-5 m.
ȼɨɞɨɡɚɫɢʄɟɧɢɩɨɤɪɟɧɭɬɢɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɧɚɤɥɢɡɚɜɚɧɚɞɟɫɧɭɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɧɭɬɪɚɤɭɭɫɦɟɪɭɤɚ
Ɍɭɪɢʁɢɲɬɨɡɚɯɬɟɜɚɫɬɚɥɧɨɱɢɲʄɟʃɟ
Ɋɚɤɨɜɚɛɚɪɚ
Figure 5. Landslide layout ''Rakova bar 2''

ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɨʁɟɭɤɭɩɧɨɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟȻɭɲɟʃɟɦ ɤɪɨɡ ɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɧɭ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɭ ɭ

ɧɟɩɨɫɪɟɞɧɨʁ ɡɨɧɢ ɢɫɩɨɞ ɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚ, ɭɫɬɚɧɨɜʂɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɫɥɟɞɟʄɟ: Ⱥɫɮɚɥɬɧɢ ɡɚɫɬɨɪ ɢɦɚ
330
ɭɤɭɩɧɭɞɟɛʂɢɧɭ ɨɞ ~ d = 4 cm, ɩɪɢ ɱɟɦɭ ʁɟ ɛɢɥɨ ɦɨɝɭʄɟ ɪɚɲɱɥɚɧɢɬɢ ɫɥɨʁ Ɍɚɦɩɨɧɫɤɢ

ɫɥɨʁ ɨɞ ɦɟɲɚɜɢɧɟ ɬɭɰɚɧɢɤɚɢɲʂɭɧɤɚɚɥɢɫɚɩɭɧɨɩɟɫɤɚɝɥɢɧɟɢɩɪɚɲɢɧɟɤɨʁɢ ɢɦɚ
ɞɟɛʂɢɧɭ t = 25 - 35 FPɱɟɫɬɨʁɟɭɬɨɧɭɨɭɝɥɢɧɟɧɭɩɨɫɬɟʂɢɰɭ
ȼɨɞɚɫɟɞɢɮɭɡɧɨɪɚɡɥɢɜɚɩɨɬɟɪɟɧɭɭɜɢɞɭɦɪɟɠɟɜɨɞɨɬɨɤɚɩɨɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢɲɬɨɧɚɫɬɚʁɟ
ɡɛɨɝɧɟɦɨɝɭʄɧɨɫɬɢɩɨɧɢɪɚʃɚɨɛɨɪɢɧɫɤɢɯɢɢɡɜɨɪɫɤɢɯɜɨɞɚɢɡɡɚɥɟɻɚɧɚɬɟɪɟɧɭɤɨɝɚ
ɢɡɝɪɚɻɭʁɭɜɨɞɨɧɟɩɨɪɩɭɫɧɟ&+ɝɥɢɧɟ.
ɉɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬ ɝɥɢɧɚ ɭ ɤɨɪɢ ɪɚɫɩɚɞɚʃɚ ɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɨ ɜɚɪɢɪɚ ɡɚɜɢɫɧɨ ɨɞ ɫɬɟɩɟɧɚ
ɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɨɫɬɢɨɞɧɨɫɧɨɫɬɟɩɟɧɚɡɛɢʁɟɧɨɫɬɢɬɥɚȽɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɨɩɪɨɩɭɫɬʂɢɜɨɫɬɭɨɜɨʁɡɨɧɢ
ɧɚɝɥɨɨɩɚɞɚɫɚɩɨɪɚɫɬɨɦɞɭɛɢɧɟ
Ɂɚɜɢɫɧɨ ɨɞ ɪɚɡɦɚɬɪɚɧɨɝ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɨɝ ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɚ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɨɝ ɫɥɨʁɚ
ɞɟɝɪɚɞɢɪɚɧɢɯɢɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɢɯɝɥɢɧɚɧɚɬɟɪɟɧɭɢɡɧɨɫɢɨɞ- 3,5 m.
ɉɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚ ɜɟɥɢɤɢɯ ɝɪɚɞɢʁɟɧɚɬɚ ɩɨɞ ɱɢʁɢɦ ɭɬɢɰɚʁɟɦ ɫɟ ɨɞɜɢʁɚ ɮɢɥɬɪɚɰɢʁɚ ɩɪɨɰɟɞɧɟ
ɢɧɬɟɪɚɝɪɟɝɚɬɧɟɝɪɚɧɭɥɚɪɧɟɢɥɢɩɭɤɨɬɢɧɫɤɟɜɨɞɟɭɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɨɦɫɥɨʁɭɞɟɝɪɚɞɢɪɚɧɢɯ
ɝɥɢɧɚ ʁɟɫɬɟ ɫɟɡɨɧɫɤɨ ɝɟɧɟɪɢɫɚʃɟ ɜɟɨɦɚ ɜɢɫɨɤɢɯ ɩɨɪɧɢɯ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɚ ɭ ɬɥɭ ɲɬɨ
ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚɨɫɧɨɜɧɢɭɡɪɨɤɧɚɫɬɚɧɤɚɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɧɚɬɟɪɟɧɭ
Ʉɚɨɨɫɧɨɜɧɨɫɚɧɚɰɢɨɧɨɪɟɲɟʃɟɨɞɤɦɞɨɤɦɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɚɫɟɢɡɪɚɞɚ
ɝɚɛɢɨɧɫɤɨɝɡɢɞɚɞɭɠɢɧɟ L=35.0 mɜɢɫɢɧɟ H=3.0 m, ɫɟɦɧɚɡɚɞʃɚm ɝɞɟʁɟɜɢɫɢɧɟ
H=2.0m Ɉɧ ɫɜɨʁɨɦ ɜɢɫɢɧɨɦ ɭ ɧɨɠɢɰɢ ɤɢɡɢɲɬɚ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ ɤɨɧɬɪɚɬɟɪɟɬ ɢ ɭɜɟʄɚɜɚ
ɮɚɤɬɨɪ ɫɢɝɭɪɧɨɫɬɢ ɧɚ ɤɥɢɡɚʃɟ ɩɚɞɢɧɟ ɚ ɭʁɟɞɧɨ ʁɟ ɢ ɜɪɫɬɚ ɞɪɟɧɚɠɟ ɡɚ ɭɤɥɚʃɚʃɟ
ɩɨɞɡɟɦɢɯɜɨɞɚ
ɂɡɚ ɝɚɛɢɨɧɫɤɨɝ ɡɢɞɚ ɫɟ ɪɚɞɢ ɢɫɩɭɧɚ ɨɞ ɥɨɦʂɟɧɨɝ ɤɚɦɟɧɚ Ʉɚɨ ɫɟɤɭɧɞɚɪɧɚ ɦɟɪɚ
ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɭɫɜɚʁɚɫɟɢɡɪɚɞɚɩɪɚɜɨɭɝɚɨɧɨɝȺȻɤɚɧɚɥɚɤɨʁɢʁɟɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɢɫɩɪɟɞɡɢɞɚɨɞ
ɝɚɛɢɨɧɚ
ɄɅɂɁɂɒɌȿ³ɄɊɋɌ´
ɇɚ ɞɟɨɧɢɰɢ ɞɪɠɚɜɧɨɝ ɩɭɬɚ ,%-27 ɞɟɨɧɢɰɚ ɛɪ 02704, ɀɟɪɚɜɢʁɚ Ɍɪɲɢʄ-Ʉɪɫɬ km:
8+627ɤɥɢɡɚʃɟɦʁɟɡɚɯɜɚʄɟɧɬɪɭɩɩɭɬɚɢɩɨɞɬɥɨɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟɨɞ4-5Pɢɫɩɨɞ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟ
ɩɭɬɚ ɍ ɨɫɧɨɜɢ ɬɪɚɫɟ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɨɦ ʁɟ ɡɚɯɜɚʄɟɧɚ ɞɟɫɧɚ ɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɧɚ ɬɪɚɤɚ ɰɟɥɨɦ
ɲɢɪɢɧɨɦɭɞɭɠɢɧɢɨɞP. Ɍɪɛɭɯɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɭɬɜɪɻɟɧʁɟɧɚm ɨɞɱɟɨɧɨɝɨɠɢʂɤɚ
331
ɒɢɪɢɧɚʁɟɞɢɧɫɬɜɟɧɨɝɤɥɢɡɧɨɝɬɟɥɚɭɫɪɟɞɢɲʃɟɦɞɟɥɭɢɡɧɨɫɢɨɤɨm. Ɇɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɚ
ɞɭɛɢɧɚɤɥɢɡɚʃɚʁɟɞɨP
Ʉɪɫɬ
Figure 7. Landslide layout ''Cross 1''
ɉɪɨɰɟɫ ɤɥɢɡɚʃɚ ʁɟ ɚɤɬɢɜɚɧ ɢ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɨɱɟɤɢɜɚɬɢ ʃɟɝɨɜɨ ɲɢɪɟʃɟ ɢ ɞɚʂɟ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟ
ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɢɯɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ, ɧɚɪɨɱɢɬɨɭɜɪɟɦɟɞɭɝɨɬɪɚʁɧɢɯɢɨɛɢɥɧɢɯɩɚɞɚɜɢɧɚ ɉɪɨɰɟɫ
ɤɥɢɡɚʃɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɫɩɟɲɟɧ ɩɨɫɬɨʁɚʃɟɦ ɜɟɥɢɤɟ ɩɪɢɪɨɞɧɟ ʁɚɪɭɝɟ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɤɨʁɨʁ ɝɪɚɜɢɬɢɪɚʁɭ
ɜɟɥɢɤɟɤɨɥɢɱɢɧɟɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɢɯɜɨɞɚɢɡ ɡɚɥɟɻɚȼɢɫɢɧɫɤɚɪɚɡɥɢɤɚɢɡɦɟɻɭɧɢɜɟɥɟɬɟɩɭɬɚ
ɢɞɟɥɚʁɚɪɭɝɟɝɞɟɫɟɡɚɜɪɲɚɜɚɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɟʁɟ mɧɚɞɭɠɢɧɢɨɞ m.
ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɭɤɭɩɧɨ5 ɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɢɯ ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɚɱɟɧɟɞɭɛɢɧɟɨɞ8 -21 m. ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɢɫɭ

ɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɢɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢɨɧɢɨɩɢɬɢɪɚɞɢɭɬɜɪɻɢɜɚʃɚɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟɩɟɧɟɬɚɪɰɢɨɧɟɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɫɬɢ
ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɯɫɪɟɞɢɧɚ
ɉɪɢɥɢɤɨɦɛɭɲɟʃɚɭɬɜɪɻɟɧɨʁɟɩɪɢɫɭɫɬɜɨɚɫɮɚɥɬɚɞɟɛʂɢɧɟɨɞ cm ɞɨ cmɡɚɬɢɦ
ɫɥɟɞɢɫɥɨʁɫɪɟɞʃɟɞɨɞɨɛɪɨɡɛɢʁɟɧɨɝɲʂɭɧɤɚ-63 mmɫɚɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨɦɢɫɩɭɧɨɦɂɫɩɨɞ
ɫɥɨʁɚɲʂɭɧɤɚɧɚɫɬɚɜʂɚɫɟɫɥɨʁɧɚɫɢɩɚɩɪɜɨɛɢɬɧɟɬɪɚɫɟɩɭɬɚɩɪɟɪɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɤɨʁɢ
ʁɟ ɯɟɬɟɪɨɝɟɧɨɝ ɫɚɫɬɚɜɚ ɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧ ɨɞ ɡɚɝɥɢʃɟɧɨɝ ɲʂɭɧɤɚ ɢ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɟ ɝɥɢɧɟ ɫɥɚɛɨ
ɡɛɢʁɟɧɢɦɟɫɬɢɦɢɱɧɨɩɨɜɟʄɚɧɟɜɥɚɠɧɨɫɬɢɈɜɢɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɫɟɩɪɨɬɟɠɭɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟcca 3m.
ɋɥɨʁɟɜɟ ɫɚɦɨɧɢɤɥɨɝ ɬɥɚ ɭ ɨɫɧɨɜɢ ɧɚɫɢɩɚ ɢɡɝɪɚɻɭʁɟ ɞɟɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɨ ɩɪɨɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɚ
ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɚ ɝɥɢɧɚ Ɇɟɤɟ ɞɨ ɩɨɥɭɬɜɪɞɟ ɤɨɧɡɢɫɬɟɧɰɢʁɟ ɫɪɟɞʃɟ ɩɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɚ ɋɥɨʁ ɫɟ
ɩɪɨɬɟɠɟɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟcca 5m.
Ʌɚɩɨɪɨɜɢɬɚ ɝɥɢɧɚ ɫɟ ɩɪɨɬɟɠɟ ɢɫɩɨɞ ɨɜɨɝ ɫɥɨʁɚ ɢ ɨɧɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɥɭɬɜɪɞɟ ɤɨɧɡɢɫɬɟɧɰɢʁɟ
ɦɚɫɢɜɧɟɫɬɪɭɤɬɭɪɟɢɡɪɚɡɢɬɨɜɢɫɨɤɨɩɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɚȾɭɛɢɧɚɞɨɤɨʁɟɫɟɠɭɥɚɩɨɪɨɜɢɬɟɝɥɢɧɟ
ɢɡɧɨɫɢcca 10m.
Ʌɚɩɨɪɢɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɢɥɚɩɨɪ ʁɟɡɚɫɬɭɩʂɟɧɭɨɫɧɨɜɢɬɟɪɟɧɚɢɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚɤɜɚɡɢɩɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɟ
ɫɬɟɧɟɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨɝɢɥɢɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ-ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨɝɫɚɫɬɚɜɚ
ɍɡɨɧɢɩɭɬɚ ɧɢɜɨɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɟɜɨɞɟɭɬɟɪɟɧɭɨɫɦɚɬɪɚɧʁɟɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɢɨɞ-4.7 m.
332
ɇɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɧɚɥɚɡɚ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɭ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɢ ɭ Ƚɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɨɦ ɞɟɥɭ ɨɜɟ

ɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɨ ɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɟ ɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɟ ɢ ɧɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɪɟɤɨɝɧɨɫɰɢɪɚʃɚ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɟ ɫɭ
ɫɥɟɞɟʄɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɟɪɟ:
ɇɚ ɞɟɥɭ ɢɫɩɪɟɞ ɩɪɨɩɭɫɬɚ ɤɪɨɡ ɬɪɭɩ ɩɭɬɚ ɢɡɜɨɞɢ ɫɟ ɡɚɦɟɧɚ ɧɚɫɢɩɚ ɬɪɭɩɚ ɩɭɬɚ
ɞɪɨɛʂɟɧɢɦɤɚɦɟɧɢɦɚɝɪɟɝɚɬɨɦɝɪɚɧɭɥɚɰɢʁɟmm ɫɚɩɚɞɨɦɨɞɩɪɟɦɚɤɨɫɢɧɢ
ɧɚɫɢɩɚɞɟɫɧɚɫɬɪɚɧɚɫɬɟɩɟɧɚɫɬɢɦɡɚɫɟɰɚʃɟɦɬɚɤɨɞɚɫɟɢɡɜɪɲɢɭɤɥɚʃɚʃɟɦɭʂɟɜɢɬɨɝ
ɩɨɞɬɥɚɢɡɨɫɧɨɜɟɬɪɭɩɚɩɭɬɚ
ɇɚ ɞɟɥɭ ɢɡɚ ɩɪɨɩɭɫɬɚ ɤɪɨɡ ɬɪɭɩ ɩɭɬɚ ɭ ɞɭɠɢɧɢ ɨɞ m ɢɡɜɨɞɢ ɫɟ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɚ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɨɞ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɤɨɦɚɞɚ ȺȻ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ʁɟ ɫɚɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɚ ɨɞ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ
ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚcm ɤɨʁɢɫɟɧɚɥɚɡɟɧɚɨɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨɦɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭmɒɢɩɨɜɢɫɭɞɭɠɢɧɟ
14.0 mɇɚɝɥɚɜɧɚɝɪɟɞɚɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚx 100 cm (b x H). Ʉɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚɫɟɞɭɠɢɧɨɦɨɞ
min 6,0m ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɭɫɥɨʁɥɚɩɨɪɚ
Ɋɟɝɭɥɚɰɢʁɚ ɚɬɦɨɫɮɟɪɫɤɢɯ ɜɨɞɚ ɫɟ ɜɪɲɢ ɡɚɦɟɧɨɦ ɩɨɫɬɨʁɟʄɢɯ ɢ ɢɡɪɚɞɨɦ ɧɨɜɢɯ
ɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɢɯ ɢ ɡɟɦʂɚɧɢɯ ɤɚɧɚɥɚ ɞɨɤ ɫɟ ɪɟɝɭɥɚɰɢʁɚ ɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɢɯ ɜɨɞɚ ɜɪɲɢ ɡɚɦɟɧɨɦ
ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ ɭ ɬɪɭɩɭ ɩɭɬɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɢɡɪɚɞɨɦ ɩɨɞɭɠɧɢɯ ɢ ɩɨɪɟɱɧɢɯ ɞɪɟɧɚɠɚ ɭ ɨɞɧɨɫɭ ɧɚ
ɨɫɨɜɢɧɭɩɭɬɚ
ɋɥ
ɋɥɢɤ
ɥɢɤɚ
ɢɤɚ
ɢɤ ɉɨ
ɉɨɩɪ
ɨɩ
ɩɪɪɟɱ
ɪɟɱɧɢ
ɧɢ ɩɪɟ
ɪɟɫɫɟɟɤɤɬɬɟɟɪɟ
ɪɟɧɚ
ɧɚ ɫɚɚɫɚɧɚ
ɧɚɰɢ
ɰɢɨɧ
ɰɢɨɧɢɦ
ɨɧɢɦ ɦɟɪɚɦɚ
ɢɦ
Figure 8. Cross section off terrain with remedial measures
measu
s res
ɁȺɄȴɍɑȺɄ
Ʉɚɨɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚɜɟɥɢɤɢɯɚɬɦɨɫɮɟɪɫɤɢɯɜɨɞɚɲɬɨɭɬɢɱɟɢɧɚɩɨɞɢɡɚʃɟɧɢɜɨɚɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɟ
ɜɨɞɟ ʁɚɜʂɚʁɭ ɫɟ ɧɟɫɬɚɛɢɥɧɨɫɬɢ ɭ ɬɟɪɟɧɭ ɍɫɜɨʁɟɧɟ ɦɟɪɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟ ɫɭ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɨɞȺȻɡɢɞɨɜɚɝɚɛɢɨɧɫɤɢɯɡɢɞɨɜɚɢɡɚɜɟɫɟɲɢɩɨɜɚɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɟɧɚɱɟɬɢɪɢ
ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɚɩɪɢɦɟɪɚɢɡɩɪɚɤɫɟɇɚɢɡɛɨɪɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɭɬɢɰɚɥɟɫɭɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɟɢ
ɝɟɨɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɟɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɟɬɟɪɟɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɚɤɥɢɡɧɟɩɨɜɪɲɢɪɟɲɚɜɚʃɟɜɢɲɤɚɜɨɞɟɢ
ɞɪɭɝɢɮɚɤɬɨɪɢɍɫɜɨʁɟɧɟɦɟɪɟɫɚɧɚɰɢʁɟɫɭɨɩɬɢɦɚɥɧɟɡɚɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɭɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɪɚɧɝɩɭɬɚ
ɢɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɬɟɬɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɚ
ɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɨ-ɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɚɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɮɨɬɨɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɡȺɪɯɢɜɟɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɚɂɆɋ
ɋɥɨɛɨɞɚɧȶɨɪɢʄȽɟɨɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɢȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ
ɆɢɥɚɧɆɆɚɤɫɢɦɨɜɢʄɆɟɯɚɧɢɤɚɬɥɚȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ
ɉɟɬɚɪɆɢɬɪɨɜɢʄɋɚɧɚɰɢʁɚɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɢɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɬɥɚȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ
333
UDK 624.042.7
624.131.55(497.2)
DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF THE

LIULIAKOVITSA TAILINGS DAM
Nikolay Kerenchev, Lena Mihova
University of architecture, civil engineering and geodesy – Sofia; Hr. Smirnenski
1, Bulgaria; kerenchev@hotmail.com , l_mihova@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT:
Liulyakovitsa tailings dam with its height of about 180 m and length of 8600 m is the biggest
tailing dam in the Balkans. This paper analysis the seismic behaviour of the dam based on
Finite element method. Time history dynamic analyses using scaling real and synthetic
earthquake accelerograms are performed. Seismic coefficients for pseudo static slope stability
analyses are also determined. The seismic response of the dam is described. Based on the
strength reduction technique the most significant failure mechanisms are estimated. The
seismic coefficients for specific failure mechanism as a ratio of the peak average seismic
acceleration of the sliding soil body and peak ground acceleration are obtained. Most of the
calculations are performed using the PLAXIS 2D software for geotechnical analyses.
',1$0,ý.$$NALIZA JALOVIŠNE BRANE

LILIJANKOVITSA
REZIME:
-DORYLQDEUDQH/LXOLDNRYLWVDþLMDMHYLVLQDRNRPLGXåLQDPQDMYHüDMHEUDQDQD
UHFL2YDMUDGDQDOL]LUDVHL]PLþNRSRQDãDQMHEUDQHQDRVQRYXPHWRGHNRQDþQLKHOHPHQDWD
3URYRGH VH GLQDPLþNH DQDOL]H YUHPHQVNH LVWRULMH SRPRüX VNDOLUDQMD VWYDUQLK L VLQWHWVNLK
XEU]DYDQMD ]HPOMRWUHVD 7DNRÿH VX RGUHÿHQL VHL]PLþNL NRHILFLMHQWL ]D DQDOL]X VWDELOQRVWL
nagiba pseudo-QDJLED 2SLVDQD MH VHL]PLþND UHDNFLMD EUDQH 1D RVQRYX WHKQLNH VPDQMHQMD
snage procenjXMXVHQDM]QDþDMQLMLPHKDQL]PLRWND]D'RELYHQLVXVHL]PLþNLNRHILFLMHQWL]D
VSHFLILþQLPHKDQL]DPRWND]DNDRRGQRVQDMYHüHJSURVMHþQRJVHL]PLþNRJXEU]DQMDNOL]QRJ
WLMHODWODLYUãQRJXEU]DQMDWOD9HüLQDSURUDþXQDVHYUãLSRPRüXVRIWYHUD3/$.6,6']D
geotHKQLþNHDQDOL]H
INTRODUCTION
Liulyakovitsa tailings dam is located in the central part of Bulgaria, 90 km east of Sofia, and
is a structure for the Asarel-Medet mining complex. The construction of the tailings dam
began in the 80 years of the last century on a rock ground at elevation +639.0 m and at present
the ridge of the tailings material is at elevation +830.0 m. A construction of the tailings dam
up to elevation +930,0 m is forthcoming.
334
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Views of the Liulyakovitsa tailings dam: (a) from the side; (b) from above.
In the process of upgrading the embankment, insitu and laboratory tests were carried out to
determine the physic-mechanical parameters of the material and their change over time. As
Bulgaria falls within the earthquake zone, the analysis of the seismic slope stability of the
dams is in most cases relevant for the design. Dynamic soil properties have been defined in
a number of publications in the field of soil dynamics and seismic geoengineering: Das
(1993) [1]; Ishihara (1996) [7]; Kramer (1996) [8]. A summary of studies in the field of soil
dynamics in Bulgaria up to 2005 was done by Hamova (2005) [2], and more recent studies
in this area in Bulgaria are as follows: Milev (2017-2019) [21] - [25]; Kerenchev (2012-2019)
[9] - [11]; Mihova & Kerenchev (2013-2014) [19], [20]. Publications related to the
examination of the dynamic properties of the material of Liuliakovitsa tailings dam have been
made by the authors: Kerenchev (2019) [12]; Kerenchev & Milev (2019) [13]. The
determination of the variable seismic coefficient for the slope stability estimation, which
depends on the geometry and location of the potential slip surface, was done by Kerenchev
et al. (2018) [14]. Pseudostatic approach is a traditional engineering approach for the
examination of the slope stability of dams and the ground bearing capacity. It is included in
the current design standards in Bulgaria and aspects of its application are discussed in the
publications: Kostova (2011) [15], [16], (2018) [17]; Sulay & Tanev (2016) [30]; Sulay
(2019) [29]. In Eurocode 8.5, it is explicitly noted that the pdeudo-static approach is not
suitable for installations where pore pressure is generated.
The results of a dynamic “time history” analysis of the Liuliakovitsa tailings dam conducted
with the Plaxis 2D software are summarized here.
DYNAMIC ANALISYS OF THE DAM
Fig. 2. Generalized model geometry and finite element mesh

335
In Figure 2 a 2D finite-element model for the main wall of the tailings dam is presented. The
tail material is divided in 4 layers - A, B, C and D. The support prisms 2a, 2b and tongue 20
are made of rock material. For the shear modulus reduction curve as a function of shear
deformations (G / G0 - ȖHDQG*- ȖIRUWKHWDLOOD\HUVDUHEDVHGRQWKHGHSHQGHQFLHVRIWKH
authors Hardin & Drnevich (1972) [3], [4] and for prisms and language - by the authors Seed
& Idris (1970) [28] for gravel. The results are presented in Fig. 3, compared to the results of
the authors Seed and Vucetc & Dobry (1993) [31].
(a) (b)
Fig. 3. G / G0 curves: (a) for the tailing material; (b) for supporting prisms and material 20
The mathematical model for dynamic analysis of the main wall is in accordance with the
following premises:
x For the cross-section geometry, a multilayer model corresponding to the stages of
construction of the facility (Fig. 2) is presented, as the layers are generalized in order to avoid
too many refraction surfaces and reflection of seismic waves, which negatively affects the
accuracy.
x The boundaries of the study area are modelled with dampers, which sufficiently
absorb the seismic wave and simulate an infinite half-space of the earth base.
x The seismic action is applied by an accelerograms.
x For soil layers, an advanced elasto-plastic constitutive HS small model (Plaxis [26])
is used. The main prerequisites of this model are the following: the relation between stresses
and strains is hyperbolic; stress path stiffness dependence; plastic, volumetric and deviatoric
deformations are accounted; G module degrades under dynamic load; the minimum value of
the G module is defined by the unloading-reloading stiffness; the Mohr-Coulomb failure
criterion. The HS small model requires a significant number of material parameters as shown
in Table 1 and Table 2.
x Viscous properties, friction and development of plastic deformations in soils cause
the attenuation of the oscillations over time. Using the constitutive HSS model, this "internal"
damping is accounted, but to a degree less than actually observed and tested in soils. The
reason for this is the fact that the hyperbolic strain dependence in small deformations is close
to linear and it is impossible to account for the hysteretic behaviour of the material in this
zone. That's why it's required to take into account the hysteretic behaviour of the material in
336
this area. Therefore, the introduction of additional viscous damping is required following the
model of Rayleigh (1945) [27]. Rayleigh coefficients Į and ȕ are obtained as functions of
two frequencies f (Hz) at the desired attenuation factor ȟ. The authors' approach is applied
here: Hashash & Park (2002) [5] and Hudson, Idriss & Beirkae (2003) [6] for the first
frequency to accept the first natural frequency of the soil deposit f 1 and for the second
frequency - the closest odd number, greater than the ratio f p / f 1 , where fp is the predominant
frequency of the input seismic signal of the Fourier spectrum. According to the literature, an
DGGLWLRQDOYLVFRXVDWWHQXDWLRQRIȟ ZDVDVVXPHG
Table 1. Material parameters of the tailings dam material for the HSS constitutive model
Layer Ⱥ Layer B Layer C Layer D
Ȗn
Natural unit weight 19,4 19,5 19,6 20,4
(kN/m3)
Ȗr
Saturated unit weight - - 20,4 21,5
(kN/m3)
p ref
Reference stress for stiffness 100 100 100 100
(kPa)
Tangent stiffness for primary E oed,ref
8 000 15 000 10 000 12 000
oedometer loading (kPa)
Secant stiffness in standard E 50,ref
8 000 15 000 10 000 12 000
drained triaxial test (kPa)
E ur,ref
Unloading/reloading stiffness 28 000 52 500 35 000 42 000
(kPa)
G 0,ref
Initial shear modulus 78 780 94 575 105 679 120 246
(kPa)
Poisson’s ratio for unloading Ȟ ur
0,20 0,20 0,20 0,20
/reloading (-)
Shear strains for the 0,722 of
Ȗ 0.7
the reduction of the shear 0,035* 0,040* 0,045* 0,050*
* (%)
modulus
Power factor for the stress-level m
0,6 0,6 0,6 0,6
dependency of stiffness (-)
Coefficient of lateral earth K0
0,577 0,47 0,546 0,5
pressure (-)
Failure ratio R f (-) 0,9 0,9 0,9 0,9
Cohesion c (kPa) 10 15 12 17
Friction angle ĳ (°) 25 32 27 30
*Values are based on graph shown in Fig .3a.
x The soil layers below the water line (WL) in the tail body are modelled with non-
drained behavior, which means that the bulk modulus of the two-phase soil is formed by that
of the solid phase and by the bulk modulus of the water (Kw = 2.2.106 kPa)
x In the course of the dynamical action, the model generates additional pore pressure in
the tail layers below the WL. The pore pressure generated does not have cumulative value
over time during the earthquake. The model has the ability to register the value at any given
moment that would appear at every step during the calculation. This is the reason why the
resulting pore water pressure should be considered approximate.
337
Table 2. Material parameters of the supporting prisms and material 20 for the HSS constitutive model
Layer 20 Layer ɚ Layer 2b
Natural unit weight Ȗ n (kN/m3) 22 20 20
Saturated unit weight Ȗ r (kN/m3) - - -
Reference stress for stiffness p ref (kPa) 100 - -
Tangent stiffness for primary oedometer E oed,ref
50 000 100 100
loading (kPa)
Secant stiffness in standard drained triaxial
E 50,ref (kPa) 50 000 50 000 50 000
test
Unloading/reloading stiffness E ur,ref (kPa) 150 000 50 000 50 000
Initial shear modulus G 0,ref (kPa) 328 230 150 000 150 000
Poisson’s ratio for unloading /reloading Ȟ ur (-) 0,2 0,20 0,20
Shear strains for the 0,722 of the reduction Ȗ 0.7
0,003** 0,003** 0,003**
of the shear modulus* (%)
Power factor for the stress-level m
0,5 0,5 0,5
dependency of stiffness (-)
K0
Coefficient of lateral earth pressure 0,357 0,384 0,357
(-)
Failure ratio R f (-) 0,9 0,9 0,9
Cohesion c (kPa) 22 22 22
Friction angle ĳ (°) 40 38 40
** Values are based on graph shown in Fig .3b
x The soil layers below the water line (WL) in the tail body are modelled with non-
drained behavior, which means that the bulk modulus of the two-phase soil is formed by that
of the solid phase and by the bulk modulus of the water (Kw = 2.2.106 kPa)
x In the course of the dynamical action, the model generates additional pore pressure in
the tail layers below the WL. The pore pressure generated does not have cumulative value
over time during the earthquake. The model has the ability to register the value at any given
moment that would appear at every step during the calculation. This is the reason why the
resulting pore water pressure should be considered approximate.
x For the finite element mesh, a 15 nodal triangular finite element is used. A criterion
of Kuhlemeyer & Lysmer (1973) [18] for dynamic analysis is applied to determine the mesh
size, which has an average size of finite element L ave should not exceed 1/8 of the wavelength
Ȝ i.e. L ave Ȝ/ 8 = V Smin / (8 f max ) , where: V s,min V s , min is the minimum wave velocity in
soil deposit; f max - maximum frequency of the action.
The selection of seismic actions in the form of accelerograms for verification of the dynamic
analysis is subject to the following criteria:
x Analysis with real accelerograms typical for the region with predominant frequency,
as close as possible to the first natural frequency of the soil deposits f 1 (for the tailings dam
up to 830.0 m f 1 = 0.83 Hz) scaled for different return periods (TR).
x Analysis with accelerograms generated by the RSHA method / PSHA / for different
return periods (TR), with a predominant frequency as close as possible to the first natural
frequency of the soil deposits f 1 .
x Analysis with synthetic accelerograms generated by the deterministic approach
/ DSHA /, with a predominant frequency as close as possible to the first natural frequency of
the soil deposits f 1 .
338
x The accelerograms of Figs. 4, Fig.5 and Fig. 6. are used.
Fig. 4. Pernik ȿW AQ085 2Hz; PGA=0,4g (TR ɝ PGA=0,177g (TR ɝ
Fig. 5. DDD8 magnitude ɆD15; Vs=800m/s; 5 Hz; PGA=0,23g
Fig. 6. N3 Vs=1000m/s, TR ɝHz; PGA=0,332g
RESULTS
The results of the calculations are summarized in Table. 3 and are shown in Fig. 7- Fig. 11.
Table 3. Maximal displaxements u max , accelerations ɚ max deviatoric deformations Ȗ s,max

Ⱥɤɫɟɥɟɪɨɝɪɚɦɚ PGA (g) Ⱦɢɧɚɦɢɱɧɨ |u max | ɚ max /PGA Ȗ s,max (%)
ɜɪɟɦɟV (cm)
Pernik-10 000 0,400 30 21 0,86 0,3
Pernik-1000 0,177 30 7 1,3 0,1
DDD8 0,230 10 8,5 0,91 0,2
N3 0,332 40 42 1,0 0,3
339
Fig. 7. Specific points for results
Fig. 8. Horizontal displacement accelerograms Pernik, PGA=0,4g
Fig. 10. Displacement (u,cm) /Time (t, s) of the points of (Fig. 9) accelerogram Pernik, PGA=0,4g
Fig. 11. Deviatoric strains accelerograms Pernik, PGA=0,4 g

340
From the analysis of the results, the following conclusions were made:
x The maximum displacements u max in the main wall are reached in an area along the
inclined part of the tailings dam deposits, with peak values being obtained slightly below the
apex of the slope and at the top of the boulder dam. The horizontal displacements are about
40 cm.
x For the main dam, the maximum accelerations ɚ max are reached in the areas at the top
of the slope. As an example, they are close to the maximum PGA amplitude of the input
accelerograms. Amplification of PGA accelerations is observed by a maximum of 30% for
the Pernik -1000 earthquake (with the smallest amplitude) due to the more elastic reaction of
the deposit.
x Deviatoric deformations Ȗ s,max (maximal shear deformations) trace the potential failure
zones in the tailings dam structure. Values of Ȗ s > 1% are indicative of failure (Ishihara 2003
[7]). For the main dam, deviatoric deformations were obtained with values of Ȗ s , max < 0.5%.
For the cut-RII ZDOO GHIRUPDWLRQV RI Ȗ s, max > 1% are observed in the local contact zone
between the core of the wall and the boulder dam, which indicates that the two materials slip
towards each other. Maximum deviatoric deformations occur mainly in the clay core due to
its much lower rigidity and shear strength compared to the shear resistance of the boulder
GDP7KHYDOXHVWKHUHDUHȖ s, max = 0.4 - 0.8%.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis of the seismic behaviour of the Liulyakovitsa tailings dam appears to be relevant
in assessing the stability of the facility. The analysis is based on a modern multi-parameter
computer model based on FEM, in which the simulation of seismic action and seismic
response is sufficiently consistent with the actual behaviour of this earth structure.
REFERENCES
[1] Das, B., M., (1993). Principles of soil dynamics, PWS-KENT Publishing Company, 293 p.
[2] Hamova, M., (2005). Development of soil dynamics, magazine “Construction”, No. 5.
[3] Hardin, B. O., Drenvich, V. P. (1972a). Shear modulus and damping in soil: design equation and
curves. Jour. of the Soil Mech. and Found. Division, ASCE, 98 (SM7).
[4] Hardin, B. O., Drenvich, V. P. (1972b). Shear modulus and damping in soil: Measurement and
parameter effects. Jour. of the Soil Mech. and Found. Division, ASCE, 98 (SM6).
[5] Hashash, Y., Park, D. (2002) Viscous damping formulation and high frequency motion
propagation in non-linear site response analysis. Soil dynamic earthquake engineering, 22 (7), pp.
611-624.
[6] Hudson, M., Idriss, I. M., and Beikae, M. (2003). QUAD4M : A computer program to evaluate the
seismic response of soil structures using finite element procedures and incorporating a compliant
base. rev. 2003, Center for Geotechnical Modeling Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California Davis.
[7] Ishihara, K. (2003) Soil Behaviour in Earthquake Geotechnics. Oxford Univ. Press Inc., New
York.
[8] Kramer, St., (1996). Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Simon&Schuster,
673p.
341
[9] Kerenchev, N., (2012-2013). Determining the dynamic modulus and dynamic settlement for the
“New Lead Processing” foundation – KCM Plovdiv.
[10] Kerenchev, N., (2013-2014). Developing an experimental laboratory setting for determining soil
parameters related to deformation. Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering
and Geodesy, Fascicule IV, Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. XLVI, Sofia.
[11] Kerenchev, N. (2015). Analysis of seismic slope stability and deformations. Dissertation for the
degree of PhD, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia.
[12] Kerenchev, N., (2019). On the E50 modulus of tailing dams materials. 19th Int. Multidisciplinary
Scientific Geoconference SGEM2019.
[13] Kerenchev, N., Milev, N., (2019). Assessment of the Dynamic Soil Properties for the FEM
Model of the Lyulyakovitsa Tailings Dam. Eighth Geotechnics in Civil Engineering Conference,
9UQMDþND%DQMD6HUELD
[14] Kerenchev, N., Mihova, L., Bonev, Z., Kisliakov, D., (2018). Approaches for estimation of the
performance factor for tailing dams. XVIII Anniversary Int. Scientific Conf. by Construction and
Architectre VSU’2018, Sofia.
[15] Kostova, St., (2011). Principles for determining of the soil ground bearing capacity according to
Eurocode 7. Academic journal Mechanics, Transport, Communications, Issue 2, No./ Aricle ID:
00494, http://www.mtc-aj.com.
[16] Kostova, St., (2011). Designing Methods of the Bearing Capacity of the Soils according to
Eurocode 7 and Bulgarian Norms. Academic journal, Mechanics, Transport Communications
ISSN 1312-3823 (print), ISSN 2367-6620 (online), http://www.mtc-DMFRPDUWLFOHʋLVVXH
3/3, pp.V-89-V-95.
[17] Kostova, St., (2018). Analysis of the procedure for designing of the bearing capacity of the soils
according to Eurocode 7, Academic Journal Mechanics, Transport, Communications, art.
ID:1558 ɪ;,9-16- XIV-23, Vol. 16, No. 1/3.
[18]Kuhlemeyer, R. L., Lysmer, J. (1973) Finite element method accuracy for wave propagation
problems. Jour. of Soil Mech. and Found. Division, 99 (5), pp. 421-427.
[19] Mihova, L., Kerenchev, N., (2013-2014). Shear strength of clays in dynamic loading: Part 1.
Correlations. Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy,
Fascicule IX-B, Scientific Research – II, Vol. XLVI, Sofia.
[20] Mihova, L., Kerenchev, N., (2013-2014). Shear strength of clays in dynamic loading: Part 2.
Analysis for clay of Sofia town area. Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering
and Geodesy, Fascicule IX-B, Scientific Research – II, Vol. XLVI, Sofia.
[21] Milev, N., (2017). Small-Strain Behaviour of Cohesionless Soils by Triaxial Tests and Dynamic
Measurement Methods - Seventh Geotechnics in Civil Engineering Conference, Šabac (Serbia).
[22] Milev, N., (2018). Laboratory Shear Wave Velocity Evaluation of Sofia Sofia Sand by Means of
Bender-Elements. Eighteenth Anniversary International Scientific Converence by Construction
and Architecture VSU Lyuben Karavelov, Sofia.
[23] Milev, N. (2018). Assessment of Soil Liquefaction Potential of Reconstituted Samples of Sofia
Sand From Undrained Cyclic Triaxial Tests. Sixth International Conference on Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Seismology, Kraljevo (Serbia).
[24] Milev, N., (2018). Static and Dynamic Evaluation of Elastic Properties of Sofia Sand and
Toyoura Sand by Sophisticated Triaxial Tests. Journal for Research of Materials and Structures
(ISSN 2217-8139), Belgrade (Serbia).
[25] Milev, N., (2019). Experimental Evaluation of Shear Wave Velocity Change Induced by
Repeated Liquefaction of Sofia Sand by Undrained Cyclic Triaxial Tests - International
Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (ICEGE 2019), Rome (Italy).
[26] PLAXIS, Material Models Manual. (2015).
[27] Rayleigh, J. W. S., Lindsay, R. B. (1945). The theory of sound, Dover Publications, New York.
342
[28] Seed, H. B., Idriss, I. M. (1970). Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response
analyses. University of California, Berkeley, Report No. EERC 70-10.
[29] Sulay, I., (2019). Basic principles for geotechnical design in the updated part “Soil Body” of the
Standard No. RD-02-20-2/28.08.2018 for road design. Annual of the University of Architecture,
Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Vol. 52, Fasc. 2, Sofia
[30][22] Sulay, I., Tanev, T., (2016). Stability of the road soil body – practical investigation according
regulations of Standard for Road Design and Eurocode, Magazine “Transportation Engineering
& Infrastructure”, No. 13.
[31] Vucetic, M., Dobry, R. (1991). Effect of soil plasticity on cyclic response. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117. No. 1.
343
UDK 624.154.1.042.7
SOME ASPECTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF PILE

FONDATIONS BEHAVIOUR UNDER SEISMIC
ACTION
%RULV)ROLü*5DGRPLU)ROLü $ngelos Liolios***,
0ODGHQûRVLü
* University of Belgrade, Innovation Centre, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Kraljice Marije 16, Belgrade, Serbia, e-mail: boris.folic@gmail.com
** University of Novi Sad, FTN, Dep. of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Trg
'RVLWHMD2EUDGRYLüDNovi Sad, Serbia, r.folic@gmail.com
*** Democritus University of Thrace, Dept. Civil Engineering, Xanthi, Greece,
e-mail: aliolios@civil.duth.gr
,06LQVWLWXWH%XO9RMYRGH0LãLüD%Hlgade, Serbia. e-mail:
mladen.cosic@ymal.com
ABSTRACT
The paper presents a seismic analysis of the structure-pile-soil system, of a 2D RC frame.
The analysis of individual system elements and some potential damage on two Vrancea
accelerograms, VR77NS and VRfoc86NS are presented. The impact of the response spectra
is provided for VR77NS, because the structure enters the resonant area and the damage
increase considerably. Local drift diagrams during the earthquake, and the model damage
featured as plastic hinges condition at the end of accelerograms are provided. It is indicated
that it is necessary to introduce a dynamic interaction of the structural system, which includes
not only the piles, but soil as well, because it became possible at the present level of scientific
and technological progress of the human kind.
KEY WORDS: seismic analysis, piles, dynamics SPSI, plastic hinges, response spectra
NEKI ASPEKTI ANALIZE PONAŠANJA TEMELJA

1$â,329,0$32'6(,=0,ý.,0'(-679,0$
REZIME
U radu su prikazani neki elementi analize šipova. Detaljnije je prikazana VHL]PLþNDDQDOL]D
sistema konstrukcija-šipovi-tlo, jednog 2D AB rama. Prikazan je analiza pojedinih elemenata
sistema, neka PRJXüD RãWHüHQMD QD GYD DNFHOHURJUDPD 9UDQþHH 9516 L 95IRF16
Uticaj spektra odgovora dat je za VR77NS, jer konstrukcija tada ulazi u rezonantQRSRGUXþMH
i ]QDþDMQR VH SRYHüDYDMX RãWHüHQMD Dati su dijagrami pomeranja, krajeva stubova tokom
]HPOMRWUHVD L RãWHüHQMD PRGHOD NDR VWDQMD SODVWLþQLK ]JORERYD QD NUDMX DNFHOHURJUDPD
8ND]DQRMHQDQHRSKRGQRVWXYRÿHQMDGLQDPLþNHLQWHUDNFLMDVLVWHPDNRQVWUXNFLMDXNRMHMH
potrebno XNOMXþLWL QD VDPR ãLSRYH YHü L WOR, jer to sada RPRJXüDYD SRVWLJQXWL QDXþQR
WHKQRORãNLUD]YRMþRYHþDQVWYD.
./-8ý1(5(ý,VHL]PLþNDDQDOL]D šipovi, GLQDPLþNDinterakcija konstrukcija-šip-tlo,
SODVWLþQL]JORERYLVSHNWDURGJRYRUD
344
INTRODUCTION
Piles are ostensibly simple structures, they resemble piers, but since they interact with the
soil, they require special attention. Static pile-soil interaction is a relatively simple problem,
when the system is observed separately and linearly, but it often becomes a complex
structure-pile-soil system, especially when the seismic action is introduced. Behavior of piles
in a dynamic interaction with the soil, and its special case of seismic action, was studied by
many authors such as: Penzien 1970, Novak 1980, Mayer and Rees 1977, Nogami 1987,
Nogami and Novak 1976, Dowrick 1978, Scott 1981, Pender 1993, Gazetas 1984, Mizuno
1987, Tazoh 2000, Poulos and Davis 1970, Mylonakis at all 1997, Prakash 1981, Meymand
1996, Fleming at all 1998, Makris and Badoni 1998, Wilson 1998, JSCE 2000, Finn and
Fujita 2002, Bhattacharya at all 2004, Suarez 2005, Todorovska and Trifunac 2006, 0LORYLü
and ĈRJR, Madabhushi at all 2010 etc.
A considerable number of other references can be attributed to most of the

authors/researchers mentioned above, often preceding those stated above, but this selection
can be considered sufficient for this scope of the paper. For that reason, the valuable
contribution of individual authors is further briefly described.
In (Poulos, 2017) a simplified approach was set out whereby a practicing foundation designer
can undertake the relevant calculations to satisfy the requirements for deep foundation design
in seismic areas. It includes pile design for axial loading, including the possible effects of
liquefaction, and pile design for lateral loading where liquefaction does and does not occur.
Measures to mitigate the liquefaction effects are recommended.
Todorovska and Trifunac researched the VN7S hotel in Los Angeles, which is founded on
piles. Ambient vibrations (small dilatations), as well seismic tests were studied under a
number of earthquakes. Changes of values of structural oscillation eigenperiods due to the
earthquake damage were analyzed, but also propagation, refraction and reflection of the
waves through the specific paths of the superstructure and in interaction with the soil around
the structure. Trifunac, in the research lasting several decades from the end of the 70’s of the
20th century, observed that on this building, after the San Fernando earthquake, a torsion
(ambient) oscillation tone emerged. It was also observed that in a number of years, the soil
may “consolidate” and partially recover its bearing properties, but not so the superstructure.
Novak, as early as by the beginning of the 70’s provided a considerable contribution to the
study of the dynamic interaction of piles and soil, using FEM (Novak 1974, Novak 1977,
1980 etc.). He also presented solutions in the analytical form, continuing the research of
Beredugo at all, but through the Fourier transform, Henkel and Bessel functions. He studied
the dynamical effects of a group of piles (as well as Nogami 1976, Pender 1993, Tazoh at all
1987, Gazetas at all 1992, Mylonakis at all 1997), and determined that there often was a
considerable difference in the dynamical behaviour of an individual pile and a group of piles.
He analyzed composite vertical-horizontal-rotating vibrations, in homogenous and stratified
soil, as well as the effect of the intensity of normal force.
345
Wolf introduces frequency analysis (Wolf 1980) , dividing the pile and the soil into conical
disks (Wolf 1992). Makris and Badoni 1998, Gazetas 1984, (Rovithis at all 2009) also
consider frequency analysis, and combine it often with the dynamical impedance, and inertial
and kinematic interaction.
Mayer and Rees, Matlock, introduced p-y and p-z curves for experimental static and
hysteretic load, and cone and block as a sand failure mode (after Mosher and Dawkins, 2000).
Dowrick explained radiation damping, as well as the pile model in a stratified soil.
Finn, Meymand, Madabhushi, Gazetas, Bhattacharya, Tazoh, Wilson, Dobry and Abdoun
2015, etc, studied liquefaction in piles. %RZHQ ýXEULQRYVNL DQG -DFND 2007 considered
seismic strengthening by adding piles in liquefiable soil, because of the potential lateral
spreading.
RESEARCH METODS OF PILES IN EARTHQUAKES
Table 1. Linear and non linear behaviour of soil - pile –structure system elements
Table 1. Linearno i nelinearno ponašanje elemenata sistema konstrukcija temelj tlo
System Element Linear (or Nonlinear analysis Exists or Analysis
nonlinear) analysis not
Structure Linear Nonlinear PO/TH/FA
Foundation - raft Linear Nonlinear Yes/No** PO/TH/FA
Foundation – pile Linear Nonlinear PO/TH/FA
Weak or - Nonlinear Yes/No*** PO/TH/FA
slip and inner zone
Link elements Linear: Nonlinear p-y or p-z Yes/No
Elastic (or secant*) curve
Soil Linear Nonlinear
* Secant method is practically a linearized nonlinear soil model
** For some types of bridge piers, no top beams or decks are constructed.
*** If necessary, for instance because of a more precise analysis, negative friction etc.:
PO PushOver, TH Time history, FA Frequency Analysis can be introduced
In essence, the piles can be considered using the decomposition and integral methods. When
the model of the structure-pile-soil system is divided into substructures, it is then the
decomposition method. The decomposition method is usually used to analyze cinematic and
inertial interactions. Frequency analysis is used in the determination of dynamic impedance
as well as in the integral method. A special method can be introduced, by analogy with
structural statics methods, but adapted for these models: i.e. element substitution method.
The element substitution method can be used with both the decomposition method and the
integral method. To facilitate the determination of these methods (and combinations thereof),
Table 1 is formed.
346
In table 1 it is possible that the weak zone of soil around the pile and the soil is completely
replaced with nonlinear curves, or that the pile-weakened soil contact zone is modelled with
an added linking element. P-y curves are used for the horizontal direction, and p-z for vertical
reaction etc. The Nogami model is presented in figure 2 with a number of nonlinear springs
and damping. All these methods can be quasi-static PO, dynamic TH or frequency FA.
Stratified soil additionally complicates this problem, but it is not considered in this paper,
except for explanation of standing piles, or through use of substituting soil models (figure 1).
When applying the p-y and p-z curves, it is important to use hysteresis curves, since they
determine the dynamic behaviour of the soil in contact with the pile in more detail. Correction
of hysteresis curves with respect to behaviour under dynamic action is only possible if
dynamic testing exists, and it is usually performed in tanks on platforms, or on centrifuges
on scaled-down models.
)LJXUH7\SLFDOVWLIIQHVVSURILOHVIRUIRXQGDWLRQVWUDWDɚ&RQVWDQW6WLIIQHVV7\SLFDORI

overconsolidation clay) b) Parabolic stiffness (Typical of sand), c) Linearly increasing stiffness
(Typical of soft clay) (after Pender 1993)
Slika 1 7LSLþQL modeli promene krutosti tla po dubini: a) konstantna krutost (WLSLþQD]D
prekonsolidovane gline) b) SDUDEROLþQD krutost (WLSLþQD]Dpesak) c) linearna krutost (WLSLþQD]Dmeke
gline) (prema Pender 1993)
Each of the soil models in figure 1, have a corresponding stiffness and damping. Pile damping
is provided in table 2. When using p-y curves as hysteresis MultiLinear plastic (MP) link
elements it is necessary to determine a linear and nonlinear part of the link (element). The
linear part of an MP link in sand is linearly variable (increasing) by depth, figure 1c. The
variable of the initial stiffness (formula 1) k o by depth is provided in API recommendations,
)ROLü%DWDOOfor saturated and dry sand, and three states of compactness.
347
k ko y (1)
Static stiffness can be seen as a boundary problem of stiffness, when frequency tends to zero,
then dynamic stiffness tends to be static value. Dynamic stiffness is generally calculated as
dynamic impedance, which actually consists of two parts, dynamic stiffness and twisting.
Both dynamic stiffness and damping are generally frequency dependent.
Table 2. Dimensionless pile head damping coefficients for f ! f n (after Madabhushi at all 2010)
Tabela 2. Bezdimenzionalani koeficijenti prigušenja glave šipa za f ! f n (prema Madabhushi i dr.
1984)
Soil Model ] HH ] HM ] MM
E Es 1.10 f D § E p
· 0,17 0.85 f D § E p · 0,18 0.35 f D § E p · 0, 20
0.80E ¨ ¸ 0.80E ¨ ¸ 0.35E ¨ ¸
Q S ¨© E s¸
¹ Q S ¨© E sD ¸¹ Q S ¨© E sD ¸¹
E Es z / d 1.20 f D § E p · 0,08 0.70 f D § E p · 0,05 0.35 f D § E p · 0,10
0.70E ¨ ¸ 0.60E ¨ ¸ 0.22E ¨ ¸
Q S ¨© E sD ¸¹ Q S ¨© E sD ¸¹ Q S ¨© E sD ¸¹
E Es z / d 1.80 f D 1.00 f D 0.40 f D
0.60E 0.30E 0.20E
QS QS QS
R(t )
S (Z ) dynamic impedance (2)
U (t )
S (Z ) K (Z ) iZ C (3)
S (Z ) - Impedance for a specific characteristic form (tone) of response: translation, rotation,

etc. (referring to the ratio of dynamic force vs. corresponding displacement, or dynamic
moment to rotation)
R(t ) - Dynamic force or moment
U (t ) - Dynamic displacement or rotation
K (Z ) - Dynamic stiffness of the pile (kN/m)
Z - Frequency (rad/s)
C - Damping coefficient (kNs/m)
i - Imaginary number
S f C ZC
] (Z ) (4)
K 2K
S (Z ) K [k (Z ) 2] (Z ) i ] (5)
348
Figure 2 Nogami’s Far Field Soil-Pile Models for Horizontal Excitation (after Nogami and Chen.,
1987)
Slika 2. Nogamijev model sa bliskim i daljim poljem tla za horizontalnu pobudu (prema Nogami i
Chen 1987).
Figure 3 - Potential Failure Modes for Pile Group Foundations Subjected to Seismic Shaking (after
Meymand 1998)
Slika 3 3RWHQFLMDOQL REOLFL ORPD JUXSH ãLSRYD NDGD MH WHPHOM L]ORåHQ VHL]PLþNLP SRWUHVLPD (prema
Meymand 1998)
349
TYPE "A" PILE CAP TYPE "B" PILE CAP TYPE "C" PILE CAP TYPE "D" PILE CAP
3'-2"
3'-2"
3'-2"
SECTION
SECTION SECTION SECTION
2'-0"
10'-0"
2'-6"
0"
4'-0"
6'-
0 "
2'-
3'-0"
1'-3"
1'-3"
10'-0"
2'-0"
2'-6"
3'-0" 3'-0" 2'-0"
3'-0"
10'-0" 60°
2'-0"
3'-0" 3'-0"
2'-0"
2'- 3'-0" 3'-0" 2'-0"
0"
PILE CAP PLAN PILE CAP PLAN PILE CAP PLAN PILE CAP PLAN
1 PILE 2 PILES 3 PILES 4 PILES
Fig. 4 Foundation plan and primary types of (raft) pile-pile-cap combinations.

Slika 4 Osnova temelja i osnovni tipovi kombinacije (naglavice) šip-glava-šip.
SEISMIC ANALYSIS OF THE RC FRAME OF THE OVERBRIDGE
In the paper )ROLü%; Suarez 2005) for the analysis of the seismic response of the
middle frame of an overbridge, different soil models were studied. The frame consists of 4
piles, which extend as piers above the soil. The soil models such as linear elastic springs and
nonlinear models using p-y curves for sand are researched. P-y curves for saturated and dry
sand, according to Matlock and Rees, are used, but also the modified curves. The soil is
observed as single layer and two layer soil, and the standing piles, restrained at the pile toe.
Earthquake action during the time history (TH) for four types of accelerograms is researched:
first ElCentro, second Vrancea 77 and 2 accelerograms Vrancea 86. Basic models, without
tie beams are examined. A brief research report is provided here.
SEISMIC RESPONSE TO VR77NS SINGLE-LAYER SOIL
Table 3 Plastic hinge state, at the end of earthquake VR77 acc

7DEHOD6WDQMHSODVWLþQLK]JORERYDQDNUDMXDNFHOHURJUDPD]HPOMRWUHVD95
PGA 0.20 g PGA 0.25g
- Road deck-RK: 2Y
Pier tops: 2Y+1D+1E Pier tops: 4 E (1Y/pier)
Pier bases: 1IO+3E Pier bases: 1D+3E
Tie beams: - Tie beams: -
Piles: (2+5+3+4)=14Y Piles: (3+5+5+7)=20Y
Ȉ3+ Ȉ3+
Table 3 deals with the change of the state of plastic hinges at the end of the VR77NS
earthquake, for the change of peak acceleration from PGA 0.20 to PGA 0.25g. In the case of
PGA 0.25g two new plastic hinges occur, in the road deck. These hinges are the start of the
yield, so as much as the road deck is concerned, the emergency vehicles can pass, however,
350
the final conclusion requires also the analysis of the status of damage in the piers, local drift
and residual displacement. In figure 6 are presented the corresponding displacements during
the TH analysis of VR77NS, for the model and the accelerograms and plastic hinges status
from figure 5. The assessment of status in the soil after the earthquake, in p-y curves is
SURYLGHGLQWKHSDSHU)ROLü%DQG5 2018).
Figure 5 NDA State at the end of earthquake VR77NS acc., PGA 0.20 g. Soil as single layer p-y:
ĳ E .PȖ .6 kN/m3; k=16307 kN/m2, left PGA 0.20 g fracture of construction, right PGA
0.25g,.
Slika. 5 NDA Stanje na kraju zapisa ubrzanja VR77NS. Tlo jednoslojno p-\ĳ E PȖ
kN/m3; k=16307 kN/m2, gore levo PGA 0,20 g slom konstrukcije, gore desno PGA 0,25g,
Figure 6 NDA Displacement of column joints, Left PGA 0.20 g. Umax=13.16 cm, Umin=24.99 cm
diverg., Right PGA 0.25g. Umax=16.80 cm, Umin=19.93 cm
Slika 6. NDA Pomeranje þYRURYDVWXED, Levo PGA 0,20 g. Umax=13,16 cm, Umin=24,99 cm
divergira, Desno PGA 0,25g. Umax=16,80 cm, Umin=19,93 cm.
351
The damage cause is evident in the response spectrum of this accelerograms, figure 7,
because the eigenperiod of the structure is around 0.9-0.95 sec.
Figure 7 Response spectra elastic 5% damping Vrancea 77: VR77NS

Slika 7 (ODVWLþQL spektar odgovora 5% prigušenje 9UDQþHD 77: VR77NS.
What is used is the initial corrected value of the response spectra of 0.228 g. For the VR77NS
earthquake, and the structure with the period of 0.90-0.95 sec the value of the spectrum
increase is slightly above number 2 (more accurately 0.497/0.228=2.18), and with the period
of 1.1 sec it increases to 2.7 (0.62/0.228=2.72). Practically, for this direction of earthquake
action, smaller structural damage with the initial period of 0.90 to 1 sec, cause the structure
to enter resonance and cause more severe damage.
In figure 6, for PGA 0.20g there is a divergent displacement of the pier top, (but it stops at
the end of acc.) so the extreme displacement for PGA 0,20g, is 20% higher than the
displacement for PGA 0,25g. This is an anomaly, which occurs rarely, but it is possible as a
result if nonlinear TH analysis is used in dynamic interaction with the soil. For the purpose
of the anomaly verification, the accelerograms of PGA 0.19g and 0.21g, can be run, and this
would provide a better assessment of the seismic response.
The mean value of normal force per pier is around 2500 kN, so the additional moment from
the residual drift is: 2500*0.20m=500 kNm (this moment can be compared to the second
order moment according to EC 8, with behaviour factor assessment). The residual
displacement is over 20/590=3.4% of the pier height. Although the road deck damage after
the Vrancea 77NS earthquake is satisfactory, the damage status of bridge piers after this
earthquake does not permit using the bridge, not even temporarily, without considerable
additional supporting. In figure 5 and table 4, it can be seen that the status of PH at the bases
and tops of the piers are such that they have no bearing capacity, i.e. that they are very close
to the mechanism and do not have sufficient kinematic stability.
352
Table 4 Displacement, during earthquake VR77 acc.

Tabela 4 Pomeranje tokom akcelerograma zemljotresa VR77
Displacement PGA 0.20 g PGA 0.25g %
U min -24.99 -19.93 -20.25
U max 13.16 16.80 27.66
U extr : 24.99 19.93 -20.25
SEISMIC RESPONSE TO VR86FocNS SINGLE-LAYER SOIL
Figure 8 NDA Displacement of column joints, Left PGA 0.20 g. VR86FocNS. Umax=6.529 cm,
Umax=8,331 cm, Right PGA 0.25g Umin=8.864 cm, Umin=7.343 cm.
Slika 81'$3RPHUDQMHþYRURYDVWXED/HYR3*$JVR86FocNS. Umax=6,529 cm,
Umax=8,331 cm, Desno PGA 0,25g Umin=8,864 cm, Umin=7,343 cm
The mean value of the normal force per pier is around 2500 kN, so the additional moment of
the presumed drift of 1 cm (realistic is around 2-3mm) is: 2500*0.01m=25 kNm (this moment
can also be compared to the second order moment according to EC 8, with the assessment of
the realized behaviour factor).
The model parameters are the same as in the previous section, the only changed thing is the
accelerograms (earthquake) used for the seismic analysis. The peak values of this new
accelerograms are also the same: PGA 0.20g and 0.25g.
353
Figure 9 NDA State at the end of earthquake acc VR86FocNS PGA 0.20 g. Soil as single-layer p-y:
ĳ E PȖ .6 kN/m3; k=16307 kN/m2, left PGA 0.20 g fracture of construction, right PGA
0.25g.
Slika. 9 NDA Stanje na kraju zapisa ubrzanja VR86FocNS. Tlo jednoslojno p-\ĳ=34; b=1,2 m;
Ȗ N1PN N1PJRUHOHYR3*$JVORPNRQVWUXNFLMHJRUHGHVQR PGA 0,25g.
Figure 10 Response spectra elastic 5% damping VR86FocNS

Slika 10. (ODVWLþQL spektar odgovora 5% prigušenje VR86FocNS.
The peak value is obtained for the period of 0.32 sec (0.657/0.217=3.03). The initial value
0.203g (corrected 0.217 g). This spectrum is considerably inconvenient because of the local
peaks, one is at the period of 0.95 sec, and it represents an increase of almost 2 numbers in
comparison to the initial value (in this case for around 60%). The next peak is at the period
of around 1.25 sec.
354
Here, considerably smaller displacement and damage of structure are evident, due to the
VR86FocNS accelerograms. The road deck is intact, and vehicle passage can be permitted.
It is necessary to obligatorily inspect the pier tops (status of cracks, concrete cover layer and
reinforcement, if visible) and also the other parts of the structure, and if it is proven that the
damage is in accordance with the anticipated status, the PH needs to cleaned, and tops of the
piers should be grouted with fast-setting mixture. If a quality fast-setting grouting mixture is
used, that is produced by a manufacturer with a known standard quality of the product, and
stored in the prescribed storage conditions, and if there is an experienced team for such
works, a bridge could be in a matter of days be repaired for temporary operation. This does
not hold for the VR77NS earthquake.
CONCLUSION
Development of design software, computers and models for dynamic interaction of the soil
-piles- structure system, increasingly demonstrates that introduction of this analysis is
necessary. It has been demonstrated, on only two relatively simple examples, that unless an
analysis of a structure as a structure-foundation-soil system is performed, there cannot be
sufficiently precise predictions of the seismic response of the structure. Therefore,
introduction of the structure-pile-soil system is necessary for any precise damage assessment,
both of the structure and of the piles, and it is also necessary for the soil status assessment
during and after earthquakes.
The presented methods, of p-y curves, provide a good seismic assessment, but they must be
combined with the approximate calculation of eigenperiods of the soil layers and with the
verification of mutual relation of stiffness of the layers (figure 3) also in the paper )ROLü5.
et al. 2018, Foliü%HWDO.
Acknowledgement:
The research described in this paper was financially supported by the Ministry of Education
and Sciences Republic of Serbia within the Project TR 36043. This support is gratefully
acknowledged.
REFERENCES:
%KDWWDFKDU\D60DGDEKXVL6%ROWRQ0ȺQDOWHUQDWLYHPHFKDQLVPRISLOHIDLOXUHLQOLTXHILDEOH
deposits during earthquakes, Geotechnique54. No. 3, 2004, pp. 203-213.
Bowen H. J., Cubrinovski M., Jacka M. E.: Effective stress analysis of pile foundations in liquefiable
soil. 2007 NZSEE Conference.
Dobry R. M., Abdoun T. M.: Cyclic Shear Strain Needed for Liquefaction Triggering and Assessment
RI2YHUEXUGHQ3UHVVXUH)DFWRU.ı. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, ASCE, (2015). : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279239866
Dowrick, D.: Erthquake resistant design, Wiley, 1978.
355
Finn W.D.L., Fujita N.: Piles in liquefiable soils: seismic analysis and design issues. Soil Dynamics
and Earthquake Engineering 22 (2002) 731–742. www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn
Fleming W.G.K., Weltman A.J., Randolph M.F., Elson W.K.: Piling Engineering 2nd edition. E&FN
SPON. (1998).
)ROLü%)ROLü5: &RPSɚUɚWLYHQRQOLQHɚUɚQɚO\VLVRID5&'IUɚPHVRLO-SLOHLQWHUɚFWLRQ%XLOGLQJ
materials and structures 61 (2018). Beograd. Serbia.
)ROLü%6HL]PLþNDDQDOL]DEHWRQVNLKREMHNDWDIXQGLUDQLKQDãLSRYLPD8QLYHU]LWHWX16DGX
)DNXOWHWWHKQLþNLKQDXND'RNWRUVNDGLVHUWDFLMD6HUELD
)ROLü5)ROLü%0LOLþLü,6WUXWDQGWLHPRGHOIRUDQDO\VLVRISLOHFDSWKLQWHUQDWLRQDOFRQIHUHQFH
Subotica. 2018. Serbia.
Gazetas G., Fan K., Tazoh T., Shimizu M., Kavvadas M., Makris N. (1992). Seismic Pile-Group-
Structure Interaction. Piles Under Dynamic Loads, Geotech. Spec. Pub. 34, ASCE, 56-93.
Gazetas, G.: Seismic response of end-bearing single piles. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering. No.2. pp. 82-93. (1984)
JSCE Japan Society of Civil Engineers. Earthquake Resistant Design Codes in Japan. 2000.
Madabhushi G., Knappett J., Haigh S.: Design of pile foundations in liquefiable soils. Imperial
College Press. London, 2010.
Mayer B.J., Reese L.C.: Analysis of single piles under lateral loading, Res. St. 3-5-78-244, Texas
Sdof Highways PT (1979).
Meymand P. J.: Shaking Table Scale Model Tests of Nonlinear Soil-Pile-Superstructure Interaction In
Soft Clay. Dissertation, D. of Ph. in Civil Engineering. Univ. of California, Berkeley. 1998.
ɆɢɥɨɜɢʄȾȭɨɝɨɆɉɪɨɛɥɟɦɢɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɟɬɥɨ-ɬɟɦɟʂ-ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɋɪɩɫɤɚɚɤɚɞɟɦɢʁɚ
ɧɚɭɤɚɢɭɦɟɬɧɨɫɬɢɨɝɪɚɧɚɤɭɇɨɜɨɦɋɚɞɭɇɨɜɢɋɚɞ6HUELD
Mizuno H.: Pile damage during earthquake in Japan. Experiment, analysis and observation. Dyn.
Resp. of Pile Foundations. Proc. Geotech. Eng. Div. of ASCE. Pp.39-52 (1987)
Mosher R., Dawkins W.: Theoretical Manual for Pile Foundations, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Report ERDC/ITL TR-00-5, Washington, USA, 2000.
Mylonakis G., Nikolaou A., Gazetas G.: Soil-pile-bridge seismic interaction: kinematic and inertial
effects. Part 1: soft soil. Earthquake Engineering And Structural Dynamics, VOL. 26, 337-
359 (1997)
Nogami T., Chen H.-L. Prediction of Dynamic Lateral Response of Nonlinear Single-Pile by Using
Winkler Soil Model. Experiment, analysis and observation. Dyn. Resp. of Pile Foundations.
Proc. Geotech. Eng. Div. of ASCE. Pp.39-52 (1987)
Nogami T., Novak M. Soil-Pile Interaction in Vertical Vibration, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 4(3),
pp. 277-294. (1976).
Novak M. (1974). Dynamic Stiffness and Damping of Piles. Can. Geotech. J., 11(4), pp. 574-598.
Novak M. (1977). Soil-Pile Interaction. Proc. 6th World Conf. Earthquake Eng., New Delhi, Vol. 4,
pp. 97-102.
Novak, M.: Soil-pile interaction under dynamic loads. Institution of Civil Engineerings. Numerical
methods in offshore piling, London, 1980. pp. 59-68.
Pecker, A.: Earthquake Foundation Design; in Advanced Earthquake Engineering Analysis, Ed. A.
Springer, Win New York, 2007, pp. 33-42
Pecker, A.: Soil Structure Interaction; in Advanced Earthquake Engineering Analysis, , Ed. A.
Springer, Win New York, 2007, pp. 43-62
Pender M.J. (1993): Aseismic pile foundation design analysis, Bulletin of the New Zealand NS of EE,
Vol. 26, No.1, March, 49-160.
Penzien J. (1970): Soil-pile foundation interaction. Earthquake engineering. Prentice-hall, inc.,
Englewood Cliffs. N.J. London. Pp. 349-381.
Poulos H., Davis E.: Pile Foundation Analysis and Design, Rainbow-Bridge Book Co, 397p, 1980.
Prakash S.: Soil Dynamics. McGraw-Hill Book Company. New York 1981.
356
Rovithis E.N, Pitilakis K.D., Mylonakis G.E.: Seismic analysis of coupled soil-pile-structure systems
leading to the definition of a pseudo-natural SSI frequency. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering 29 (2009) 1005–1015. www.elsevier.com/locate/soildyn
Scott R.: Foundation Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs. (1981).
Suarez V.: Implementation of Direct Displacement Based Design for Pile and Drilled Shaft Bents.
NCSU. North Caroliona State Univesity. October. 2005.
Tazoh T., Shimizu, K., Wakahara T.: Seismic Observations and Analysis of Grouped Piles. Dynamic
Response of Pile Foundations - Experiment, Analysis, and Observation, Geotech. Spec.
Pub. 11, ASCE, pp. 1-20. (1987).
Tazoh T.; Ohtsuki A.; Fuchimoto M.; Nanjo A.: Analysis of the damage to the pile foundation of a
highway bridge caused by soil liquefaction and its lateral spread due to the 1995 Great
Hanshin Earthquake. Paper 1978. 12WCEE. 2000. Auckland. New Zealand.
Todorovska M.; Trifunac M. (2006): Impulse response analysis of the Van Nuys 7-story hotel during
11 Earthquake (1971-1994): One -dimensional wave propagation and inferences on global
and local reduction of stiffness due to earthquake damage .Report CE 06-01. July, 2006.
University of Southern California.
Wilson D.W.: Soil-Pile-Superstructure Interaction in Liquefying Sand and Soft Clay. Dissertation, D.
of Ph. in Civil Engineering. Univ. of California at Davis (1998).
Wolf J., Meek J., Sung C. (1992). Cone Models for a Pile Foundation. Piles Under Dynamic Loads,
Geotech. Spec. Pub. 34, ASCE, 94-113.
Wolf, J. (1980). “Dynamic Stiffness of Group of Battered Piles,” J. Geotech. Eng., ASCE,106(2),
198-203.
357
6WUXþQLUDG
UDK 624.154
KARAKTERISTIKE I ANALIZA NOSIVOSTI

ŠIPOVA SISTEMA sFDPs
3HWDU6DQWUDþ**, Vereb Zoltan*, Željko %DMLü*
** *UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHWX6XERWLFL816(PDLOVDQWUDF#JIXQVDFUV
* GeoEXPERT DOO Subotica
REZIME
Rad prikazuje rezultate SUREQRJRSWHUHüHQMDãLSRYDVLVWHPDsFDPs (Full Displacemet Pile),
tokom 2017. god., na lokaciji tržnog centra sPROMENADA SHOPPING MALLs u Novom
Sadu. Koliko je autorima ovog þODQND poznato, primena ovih vrsta šipova u Srbiji, uprkos
RGUHÿHQLPSUHGQRVWLPDXRGQRVXQDSRVWRMHüHVLVWHPHMRãXYHNQLMHGRåLYHODãLUXSULPHQX
Osim rezultata pUREQRJRSWHUHüHQMDXRNYLUXNRMLRYDMUDGRPRJXüXMHSULND]DQHVXUD]OLþLWH
YUVWHRYLKãLSRYDWHKQRORJLMDL]YRÿHQMDNDUDNWHULVWLNHSUHGQRVWLLQHGRVWDFL
./-8ý1(5(ý,ãLSRYLSUREQRRSWHUHüHQMH šipa
CHARACTERISTICS AND BEARING CAPACITY

ANALYSIS OF THE sFDPs TYPE OF PILES
ABSTRACT
The paper presents the results of the load tests of "FDP" type of pile (Full Displacemet Pile),
during 2017, at the location of the shopping center "PROMENADA SHOPPING MALL" at
Novi Sad. As far as the authors of this article are aware, the application of these types of piles
in Serbia, despite certain advantages over existing systems, has not yet been widely used. In
addition to the results of the load tests, the scope of this work presents different types of theese
piles, performance technology, characteristics, advantages and disadvantages.
KEYWORDS: piles, pile load test
UVOD
Tržni centar sPROMENADA SHOPPING MALLs u Novom Sadu, ima gabaritnu površinu
cca 33,000m2, dve podzemne etaže za parkiranje vozila i 3 nadzemne etaže. 3URVHþQDNRWD
terena je cca 78.2m (r0.00m), a dubina iskopa je cca 69.5m. Konstrukcija objekta je AB, sa
punim tavanicama, zidnim platnima i stubovima na osovinskom rastojanju cca 8.5u8.5m.
Stubovi su fundirani na šipovima tipa sFDPs, preko AB naglavnicDþLMHVXGLPHQ]LMHL]PHÿX
2.3u2.3m do 5.6u5.6m. Osovinsko rastojanje šipova je cca 3, gde je VSROMQLSUHþQLNãLSD
od 0.44m. Ukupno je izvedeno cca 7,000 šipova, projektovane nosivosti cca 550.0 kN. Šipovi
VXUDÿHQLVDdna širokog iskopa na relativnoj koti od -2.75m i -4.3m, do -16.5m. Svi šipovi su
358
QDNRQ SXQRJ LVNRSD WHPHOMQH MDPH VHþHQL QD NRWL -8.5m, tako da im dužina iznosi 8.0m,
odnosno od -8.5m do -16.5m (Slika 1.). Zaštita temeljne jame je sa AB dijafragmom debljine
0.60m, sa vodonepropusnom trakom L]PHÿXlamela do dubine od cca 10.0m. Dno dijafragme
je na cca 33.0m u sloju laporovite gline. Osim konstruktivne zaštite iskopa, AB dijafragma
VOXåLLNDRYRGRQHSURSXVQDEDULMHUDSRãWRSURMHNWRPQLMHSUHGYLÿHQDKLGUR-izolacija protiv
podzemne vode, koja je QDORNDFLMLXKLGUDXOLþNRMYH]LVD'XQDYRPLNUHüHVHL]PHÿX-
76.5m. Oboreni nivo podzemne vode unutar prostora L]PHÿXAB dijafragmi se tokom celog
eksploatacionog veka objekta održava neprekidnim radom sistema depresionih bunara, koji
vodu u NROLþLQLod 120-210m3/dan, upumpavaju u gradsku kanalizacionu mrežu.
Slika 1. Vertikalna pozicija šipova i izgled FDP stabla
Figure 1. Vertical position of piles and appearance of FDP tree
Teren na predmetnoj lokaciji pripada aluvijalnoj ravni Dunava. Morfološka svojstva terena su
rezultat litološkog sastava, dejstva endo-egzogenih geoloških procesa i novijih antropogenih
uticaja urbanizacije. Generalno se mogu izdvojiti VOHGHüLOLWRORãNLþOanovi:
Nasip (n), pri-površinski deo terena, antropogenog porekla, heterogenog sastava, mešavina
peska, prašine LSRGUHÿHQRSHVNDLJOLQHtamno sivo-VPHÿHERMHGHEOMLQHL]PHÿX-3.1m.
Pesak (SM-SC) i Prašina (ML), bivša površina terena, aluvijalne naslage facije mrtvaja i
povodnja, heterogenog sastava i debljine, sa podinom QDGXELQLL]PHÿX3.0m do max 7.3m.
Preovlaÿujuüa boja je žuto-smeÿa i žuto maslinasta, a povremeno VPHÿD do siva.
Pesak (SP-SM), aluvijalna naslaga facije koritaVLWQRGRVUHGQMH]UQXMHGQDþHQRJVDVWDYDGR
po partijama prašinast, srednje do dobro zbijen, sive i sivo-maslinaste boje, sa proslojcima i
soþivima prašinato-zaglinjenog peska i peskovite prašine. Podina sloja je nejasno izražena i
postepena, od 15.2-18.0m. 3URVHþQDSHWUDFLRQDRWSRUQRVWraste sa dubinom, i kreüe se od 3-
23 MPa. Do dubine od 10-12m, proseþno je 6-7.5MPa, a dublje 15-16 MPa.
359
Pesak (SW) i Šljunak (GW), ]DYUãQLþODQDluvijalne naslage facije korita od šljunkovitog

peska i peskovitog šljunka, dobro zbijen, preovlaÿujuüe sive i sivo-maslinaste boje.
Glina (CI-CH), jezerske naslage laporovite gline, prekonsolidovane, sivo-zelenkaste boje.
7DEHOD3DUDPHWULL]GYRMHQLKOLWRORãNLKþODQRYD na lokaciji šipova

Table 1. Parameters of distinguished lithologic members at the location of piles
USCS Podina(m) J (kN/m3) Ic (step) cc (kPa) Mv (MPa) qc (MPa) SPT
(nasip) 1.2-3.1 18.5-19.5 - - - - -
SM-SC, ML 3.0-7.3 19.3-20.0 21-29 9-0 5-15 2-11 3-5
SP-SM 15.2-18.0 18.0-20.2 30-37 0 12-35 3-23 4-9
SW-GW 22.6 20.0-21.0 34-40 0 !30 12-35 16-22
CI-CH !100.0 21.1 10-15 20-50 - - -
TEHNOLOGIJA IZRADE I KARAKTERISTIKE ŠIPOVA TIPA sFDPs
FDP su vrsta AB šipova NRMHVHXJUDÿXMXna licu mesta. Ova tehnologija kombinuje prednosti
pobijenih i bušenih šipova i PRåHVHSULPHQLWLQDUD]OLþLWHYUVWHWODsa cca N SPT 30 i qc10
MPa. &LOLQGULþQDãXSOMLQD u tlu se za ovaj tip šipova IRUPLUD]ELMDQMHPRNROQRJWODSRPRüX
specijalno oblikovanog svrdla, koji se hLGUDXOLþNLXWLVNXMHX]URWDFLMXZbijanje poboljšava
karakteristike tlaãWRRYLPãLSRYLPDGDMHSRYHüDQXQRVLYRVW1DMþHãüLSUHþQLNje 620mm, a
PRJXüi su i 360, 440 i 510mm. =DYLVQR RG WLSD PDãLQH X] VWDQGDUGQX GXåLQX YRÿLFH VH
postižu dubine bušenja od 11-30m, sa tzv. Kelly produžetkom od 15-38m, a uz dodatak i
brzog rešetkastog produžetka od 25.5-42m. Slika 2. prikazuje dva tipa svrdla: standardno
(levo) i sa potrošnim vrhoPRGþHOLNDLOLspecijalnog EHWRQDYLVRNHþYUVWRüH (desno).
Slika 2. Standardno svrdlo (levo) i Svrdlo sa potrošnim vrhom (desno)

Figure 2. Standard screw (left) and Lost bit screw (right)
Kao što se vidi sa prethodne slike, svrdla su vrlo VOLþQa i sa istom funkcijom. Glavna razlika
je u potrošnom vrhu koji ostaje u tlu nakon betoniranja šipa. *OHGDMXüL RGR]JR Srvi deo
svrdla koji je konusan, služi za zbijanje tla koje je rastrešeno tokom bušenja i utiskivanja
svrdla&LOLQGULþQLGHRNRMLVOHGLSREROMãDYDVWDELOL]DFLMX]LGDEXãRWLQH7UHüLGHRsvrdla koji
360
MHWDNRÿHNRQXVDQVOXåL]D]ELMDQMHWODWRNRPbušenja i utiskivanja glave. Poslednji deo, koji

je ustvari prvi deo svrdla NRMLXOD]LXWORRPRJXüXMHbušenje i izradu FLOLQGULþQHãXSOMLQH
odnosno bušotine u tlu, u koji se betonira šip. SDJODVQRUD]OLþLWLPsvrdlima za bušenje, postoje
dve tehnike izrade šipova (Slika 3). Prve tri faze su LGHQWLþQH i sastoje se od: 1) pozicioniranja
i stvaranja platforme za bušenje na lokaciji šipa, 2) faze bušenja tla svrdlom, koje se izvodi
okretanjem i nanošenjem vertikalnog pritiska na dole. Tlo se razrahljuje kao rezultat bušenja
i dok se bušenje nastavlja, tlo se ]DKYDOMXMXüL obliku svrdla potiskuje u stranu i zbija, 3)
bušenje do željene dubine. Poslednje dve faze se razlikuju. 6WDQGDUGQDWHKQLNDL]YODþLVH
EXãDüD oprema a beton se istovremeno pumpa kroz šuplju cev unutar bušaüe opreme, 5)
ugradnja armaturnog koša u svežu betonsku masu SRPRüX NUDQD. Tehnika sa potrošnim
vrhom: 4) potrošni vrh se odvaja od EXãDüeg svrdla a armaturni koš se SRPRüXNUDQDspušta
NUR]ãXSOMHVWDEOREXãDüHJDODWD, 5) L]YODþHQMHVYUGOD uz istovremeni ispust betona u bušotinu
bez korišüenja pritiska kroz rezervoar betona koji je postavljen na vrhu EXãDüHJDODWD
Slika 3. Standardnna tehnika (gore) i Tehnika sa potrošnim vrhom (dole)

Figure 3. Stanard technique (up) and Lost bit technique (down)
361
Oprema koju ova WHKQLNDXNOMXþXMHLPDPRJXüQRVWDXWRPDWVNRJRGUHÿLYDQMDparametra D

koji je pokazatelj penetracionog otpora šipa. Što je SDUDPHWDUYHüLto se teže buši tlo LYHüD
je nosivost šipa. Glavni cilj za upotrebu ovog parametra je optimizacija dužine šipa zbog
þLQMHQLFHGDüHDNRVHWokom SURFHVDEXãHQMDGRELMHYULMHGRVWYHüDRGzahtevane, dosegnuta
dubina biti dovoljna za željeni kapacitet šipa. Ovaj je parametar je direktno vezan uz otpor
konusa iz CPT testa, odnosno raste srazmerno povHüDQMXSHQHWUDFLRQHRWSRUQRVWL
.RULVWHüL VOHGHüH R]QDNH )-utisna sila EXãDüHJ DODWD QD GROH V-penetraciona dubina, M-
WRU]LRQLPRPHQWEXãDüHJDODWDM-ugao rotacije, izraz za penetracioni parametar D glasi:
F ×s + M ×j
a=
s+ j
7LSLþDQSULND]QDGLVSOHMXXSUDYOMDþNHMHGLQLFHNRMLJUDILþNLSULND]XMHEU]LQXEXãHQMDLbrzinu
L]YODþHQMDVYUGODtorziju, utisnu silu, parametar D, potrošnju betona i sl. i dat je na slici 4.
Slika 4. Zapisnik XUDÿHQWRNRP L]YRÿHQMDãLSD (reprint sa BAUER Maschinen GmbH)

Figure 4. Report evaluated during pile instalation (reprint from BAUER Maschinen GmbH)
Nivo produktivnosti ]DYLVLRGSUHþQLNDãLSDWRU]Lje i utisne sile na svrdlu, gustine tla,

podložnosti tla zbijanju i kapaciteta betonske pumpe. Npr. BAUER Maschinen GmbH,
za izradu šipa od 14m, GDMHVOHGHüHvreme bušenja je |5.5c, betoniranje |7.5c i premešta-
nje |3c, što je ukupno |16c, odnosno cca 36 šipova na dan (za radnih 10h) ili 430m šipova.
362
Tabela 2. Prednosti i nedostaci

Table 2. Adventages and disadventages
Prednosti Nedostaci
-visoka nosivost -oãWHüHQMDQDVXVHGQLPkonstrukcijama
-smanjenje potrošnje cementa -oãWHüHQMDQDVXVHGQLPšipovima
-mala NROLþLQDostataka -beton se nakon izgradnje ne može ispitivati
-proces instalacije bez vibracija -nHPRJXünost izYRÿHQMDvelikih prHþQLNa
-visok nivo produktivnosti
-mRJXüQRVWSURPHQHGXåLne tokom rada
-smanjeni troškovi izvršenja
5(=8/7$7,352%12*237(5(û(1-$â,329$7,3$sFDPs
Na lokaciji predmetnog objekta ukupno je izvršeno SUREQLK RSWHUHüHQMD ãLSRYD Srema
metodi MLT (VWDWLþNR RSWHUHüHQMH VD NRQVROLGDFLMRP Kao kontra balast kapaciteta 65t,
NRULãüHQDMHPDãLQD]DL]UDGXãLSRYD6OLND0DNVLPDOQRRSWHUHüHQMHãLSDXNRUDNDMH
550kN, trajanje svake stepenice je 45c ili 95% konsolidacije, 4 stepenice UDVWHUHüHQMD, 3
NRPSDUDWHUDWDþQRVWLPPNDSDFLWHWKLGUDXOLþNRJNOLSDMH01PDQRPHWDUMHNODVH
WDþQRVWLu10 bara, referentne grede
g za komparatere
p su dužine po 3.0m.
Slika 5. ,QVWDODFLMD]DSUREQRRSWHUHüHQMHãLSD
Figure 5. Pile load test instalation
Pošto se zbog malog kapaciteta kontra balasta šipovi nisu mogli opteretiti do loma, YHüVamo
do radne sile od 550kN, sila loma je procenjena ekstrapolacijom po Chin-Kondner metodi:
w w 1 ædQ ö÷ 1 dQ b
Q= , Q f = lim = , K=ç
ç ÷
÷ = , =
aw + b x ® ¥ a ×w + b a è dw øw= 0 b dw ( a ×w + b )2
1DRVQRYXJHRPHKDQLþNRJSURILOD]DNOMXþHQRMHGDje šip gotovo celom dužinom i bazom, u

sloju peska SP-603URVHþDQRWSRUWUHQMDMHfS|60.0kPa, a penetraciona otpornost u zoni 8
iznad i 4 ispod baze šipa je qc|7.5MPa. 8VYDMDMXüLGDMHSUHþQLNVWDEODLED]HãLSDP
dužina 8.0m i nosivost baze qb|0.9qc, gUDQLþQDQRVLYRVWãLSDSUHPD&37PHWRGLiznosi:
363
Q f = As f s + Ab qb = 11.0 ×0.06 + 0.15 ×( 0.9 ×7.5 ) = 1.67 MN

0DNVLPDOQHYHOLþLQHVOHJDQMDWRNRPSUREQRJRSWHUHüHQMDNUHüXVHXYUORãLURNRPLQWHUYDOX
od 1.77-8.70mm, odQRVQRL]PHÿX-RGSUHþQLNDãLSD Razlog je u heterogenosti tla i
efektu grupnog dejstva šipova. Naime, svaki šip koji je ispitivan, nalazio se u grupi, ili po
QMHJRYRPRERGXLOLVUHGLQL8JUDGQMRPãLSRYD]QDþDMQRVHPHQMDLQLFLMDOQDJXVWLQDSHVND
ãWRORJLþQRLPD]DSRVOHGLFXSRYHüDQMHNUXWRVWLLQRVLYRVWLãLSDãWRMHHYLGHQWQRQD6OLFL6.
=ELUQLUH]XOWDWLSUREQRJRSWHUHüHQMDJUDQLþQDQRVLYRVWORPSUHPDPHWRGLHNVWUDSRODFLMHSR

Chin-Kondner-u i prema metodi CPT-a, prikazani su u tabeli 3.
Tabela 3. Rezultati dobijeni SUREQLPRSWHUHüHQMHP, po metodi Chin-Kondner-a i po metodi CPT-a

Table 3. Results obtained by pile load test, by the Chin-Kondner method and by CPT method
Redni broj šipa Chin-Kondner CPT Krutost za opt. Krutost za rast. Max sleganje
Sila loma Qf (kN) Sila loma Qf (kN) K (kN/mm) Kr (kN/mm) w (mm)
1 1249 224 390 4.95
2 1260 262 419 3.76
3 1216 213 198 4.84
4 1460 279 453 2.97
5 1413 463 553 1.84
6 1495 1670 414 712 1.99
7 1431 102 229 8.70
8 1419 268 415 3.23
9 1494 459 630 1.85
10 1258 398 547 2.49
11 1335 498 647 1.77
3URVHþQR 1367 - 325 472 3.49
St. devijacija 105 - 127 165 1.98
Varijacija (%) 8 - 39 35 56.8
Slika 6. .ULYHVOHJDQMDGRELMHQHSUREQLPRSWHUHüHQMHPãLSRYD
Figure 6. Load settlement curves obtained by pile load test
364
=$./-8ý$.
âLSRYLVLVWHPD)'3VSDGDMXXNRQVWUXNWLYQHHOHPHQWHNRMLSULOLNRPL]YRÿHQMDL]D]LYDMXXWOX
velika pomeranja (zbijanje). =DKYDOMXMXüLVYRMLPSUHGQRVWLPDNDRãWRVXSURGXNWLYQRVWUDG
bez vibracije, YHOLNDQRVLYRVWPRJXüQRVWSURPHQHGXåLQHWRNRPL]YRÿHQMDPDORL]QRãHQMH
PDWHULMDODWRNRPLQVWDODFLMHRYDWHKQRORJLMDX]QDþDMQRMPHULSRWLVkuje neke starije sisteme.
U našoj zemlji su FDP ãLSRYLXID]LXYRÿHQMDLDILUPDFLMHDDXWRULVXLPDOLSULOLNXda se bolje
upoznaju prilikom rada sa firmom Soletanche Bachy Rumunija, tokom izgradnje
sPromenade Shopping Malls u Novom Sadu.
Za potrebe fundiranja navedenog objekta, ukupno je izvedeno oko 7,000 šipova, dužine 8.0m.
6WDWLþNRSUREQRRSWHUHüHQMHMHXUDÿeno na 11 šipova. 3RãWRMHL]YRÿDþREH]EHGLRkontra teret
od 65t (mašina za izadu FDP šipova), ispitivanje je izvršeno samo do radne sile, odnosno
560kN. 7UHEDLPDWLXYLGXGD(&SUHGYLÿDQLYRNRMLMHPLQLYHüLRGUDGQHVLOH
da bi se RPRJXüLOa kvalitetna interpretacija i prognoza sile loma. .RULVWHüLrezultate probnog
RSWHUHüHQMDHNVWUDSRODFLMRPMHGRELMHQDSURVHþQDYUHGQRVWVLOHORPDRG01GRNMHQD
osnovu rezultata CPT dobijeno 1.67MN.
%H]RE]LUDQDUHODWLYQRYHOLNEURMSUREQLKRSWHUHüHQMDNRMLELWUHEDOLGDWLSRX]GDQHSURJQR]H
nosivosti, autori smatraju da su tokom pripreme XþLQMHQi propusti koji su devalvirali dobijene
UH]XOWDWHLVSLWLYDQMD3UYLLQDMYHüLSURSXVWNDRSRVOHGLFDãWHGQje, jeste nedovoljan kapacitet
kontra tereta. Nadalje, svaki opitni šip je bio u grupi šipova (po obodu ili sredini grupe), koji
VXXJUDGQMRPSURPHQLOLJXVWLQXSHVNDLLPDOLXWLFDMQDQRVLYRVWSRMHGLQDþQRJãLSD1DNUDMX
ako se ima u vidu heterogenost terena, opiti CPT-a su bili previše udaljeni od probnih šipova
da bi mogli biti visoko SRX]GDQDSRGORJD]DSURUDþXQQRVLYRVWL
LITERATURA
Chin, F.K. “Estimation of the Ultimate Load of Piles Not Carried to Failure”, Proc.2nd Southeast
Asia. Conference on soil Engineering, pp. 81-90, 1970.
https://www.bauer.de/export/shared/documents/pdf/bma/datenblatter/FDP_Full_Displacement_Pile_S
ystem_DE-EN_905_785_1.pdf
+LGUR]DYRGGWG1RYL6DG(ODERUDWRJHRWHKQLþNLPXVORYLPDL]JUDGQMH- E-60/16, Novi Sad 2016.
365
UDK 624.154.04
Ⱦɂ0(ɇɁɂ2ɇɂɋ$ȵ($Ʉɋɂ-$Ʌɇ2
ɉɊɂ7ɂɋɇɍ7ɂɏɒɂɉ2ȼ$ɉɊɂ0(ɇ20
ȾɂɊȿɄɌɇɂɏ&37-Ɋ(ɒ(ȵ$
ɋɥɨɛɨɞɚɧɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄɆɢɪɨʂɭɛɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ
„GeoSol" ȾɈɈɡɚɝɪɚɻɟɜɢɧɫɤɭ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɤɭɇɢɲgeosolnis@yahoo.com
ɊȿɁɂɆ(
Ɂɚ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɭɭ ɩɪɚɤɫɢ ɫɚɠɟɬɨ ɫɭ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɚ ɬɡɜ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɚ ɋɊɌ-ɪɟɲɟʃɚ LCPC(1982),
/3& ɢ 0ɢɥRɜɢʄ ɭ ɮɨɪɦɢ (2,3,4) ɱɢʁɢɦ ɫɟ ɭɜɨɻɟʃɟɦ ɭ ɤɨɧɜɟɧɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɨ
ɪɟɲɟʃɟ (1) ɲɢɩɨɜɢ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɲɭ ɭ ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɝ ɬɥɚ, ɚ ɩɚɤɟɬɨɦ
GeoData2 ɞɨɛɢʁɚʁɭɫɟɢɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɟɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɟɢɞɭɛɢɧɟɲɢɩɨɜɚ
Ʉȴɍɑɇȿ Ɋȿɑɂ: ɋPT, ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɨɜɚ.
DIMENSIONING AXIAL COMPRESSED PILES

USING DIRECT CPT SOLUTIONS
ABSTRACT
For practical application, the so-called direct CPT-solutions LCPC (1982), LPC (2012) and
Milovic (2018) are presented in the form (2,3,4) whose introduction into the conventional
solution (1) piles are dimensioned with respect to the bearing capacity of the layered soil, and
the GeoData2 package also provides load diagrams for the desired diameters and depths of
the piles.
KEYWORDS: CPT, pile bearing capacity.
ɍȼɈȾ
ɍ ɩɟɪɢɨɞɭ ɨɞ (ɭ)ɫɤɨɪɨ ɫɬɨ ɝɨɞɢɧɚ ɝeoɦeɯaɧɢɤe ɤao ɚɮɢɪɦɢɫɚɧɟ ɧaɭɱɧoɬeɯɧɢɱɤe

ɞɢɫɰɢɩɥɢɧe, ʃeɧe ɮaɡe ɪaɡɜoja ɛɢɥe ɫɭ ɜeɡaɧe ɡa ɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɚ ɬeɯɧoɥoɲɤa ɞoɫɬɢɝɧɭʄa ɭ
ɬoɦ ɩeɪɢoɞɭ. ɍɫɜajaʃɟ oɫɧoɜɧɢɯ ɤoɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɢɜɧɢɯ ɡaɤoɧa ɝeoɬeɯɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɦaɬeɪɢjaɥa,
ɩoɬɜɪɻɢɜɚɧɢɯ ɭ eɥeɦeɧɬaɪɧɢɦ ɥaɛoɪaɬoɪɢjɫɤɢɦ ɭɫɥoɜɢɦa (Terzaghi ɢ ɫɥeɞɛeɧɢɰɢ)
ɩɪɚɬɢɥɟ ɫɭ ɞɜɟ-ɬɪɢ ɞeɰeɧɢje ɪaɡɜoja ɬeoɪɢje ɩɥaɫɬɢɱɧoɫɬɢ ɬɥa, ɤoja je ɬɪaɠɢɥa ɫɜojɭ
ɥaɛoɪaɬoɪɢjɫɤɭ ɩɪoɜeɪɭ, ɲɬo je ɭ ɧaɪeɞɧoɦ ɩeɪɢoɞɭ oɦoɝɭʄeɧo ɭɫaɜɪɲaɜaʃeɦ
ɥaɛoɪaɬoɪɢjɫɤe ɬeɯɧɢɤe (ɧɩɪ. thru ɬɪɢɚɤɫɢʁɚɥɧɚ ɢ ɰɟɧɬɪɢɮɭɝɚɥɧɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɢ ɞɪ.) a
ɡaɬɢɦ je ɬeɯɧoɥoɝɢja oɦoɝɭʄɢɥa ɢ ɭɫaɜɪɲaɜaʃe oɩɪeɦe ɡa ɩoɜɪɲɢɧɫɤa ɢ ɞɭɛɢɧɫɤa
ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜaʃa ɬeɪeɧa. Tɢɦe ɫɭ ɩoɫɥeɞʃɢɯ ɞeɰeɧɢja ɬeɪeɧɫɤa ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜaʃa ɩo ɜɪɫɬaɦa,
oɛɢɦɭ, ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬɢɦa ɢ ɩɪɢɦeɧɢ ɩoɫɬaɥa ɞoɦɢɧaɧɬaɧ ɢɡɜoɪ ɩoɞaɬaɤa ɡa ɤɪeɢɪaʃe
ɪaɱɭɧɫɤɢɯ ɦoɞeɥa ɬeɪeɧa ɢ ɩɪɢɦeɧɭ ɪaɰɢoɧaɥɧɢɯ ɝeoɬeɯɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɪeɲeʃa (ɧɩɪ. Mayne
366
et al.,2009) a ɩaɪaɥeɥɧo ɭɫaɜɪɲaɜaʃe ɪaɱɭɧɫɤe ɬeɯɧɢɤe oɦoɝɭʄɢɥo je ɪaɡɜoj

ɧɭɦeɪɢɱɤɢɯ aɧaɥɢɡa ɞo ɧɢɜoa ɧa ɤoɦe oɧe 'ɩoɫɬajɭ ɫɭɩeɪɢoɪɧe ɭ oɞɧoɫɭ ɧa ɫɬɪoɝa ɚɥɢ
ɩojeɞɧoɫɬaɜʂeɧa ɪeɲeʃa ɢ ɦoɝɭ ɢɯ ɡaɦeɧɢɬɢ ɭ ɩɪoɰeɫɢɦa ɝeoɬeɯɧɢɱɤoɝ
ɤoɧɫɬɪɭɤɬeɪɫɬɜa (Potts,2003), ɲɬo ɩoɞ ɪɠaɜa ɢ Eurocode 7. Taɤo ɫe ɭ ɫaɜɪeɦeɧoj
ɝɪaɻeɜɢɧɫɤoj ɝeoɬeɯɧɢɰɢ ɢɧɠeʃeɪɫɤo oɞɥɭɱɢɜaʃe ɫɜɟ ɱɟɲʄɟ ɡaɫɧɢɜa ɩɪe ɫɜeɝa ɧa
ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬɢɦa ɬeɪeɧɫɤɢɯ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜaʃa ɢ ɧɭɦeɪɢɱɤɢɯ ɫɢɦɭɥaɰɢja, ɭɤʂɭɱɭjɭʄɢ
ɜeɪoɜaɬɧoʄɭ ɪɢɡɢɤa ɢ ɦaʃɭ ɩɪaɬʃɭ ɥaɛoɪaɬoɪɢjɫɤɢɯ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜaʃa ɢ aɧaɥɢɬɢɱɤoɝ
ɦoɞeɥɢɪaʃa – ɲɬo ɫɟ ɦɨɠɟ ɫɦɚɬɪɚɬɢ ɧɚʁɢɡɪɚɠɟɧɢʁɢɦ ɭ ɪɟɲɚɜɚʃɭ ɡɚɞɚɬɚɤɚ ɬeɦeʂeʃɚ
oɛjeɤaɬa ɧoɫeʄɢɦ ɲɢɩoɜɢɦa.
Tɪaɠeʃeɦ ɪaɰɢoɧaɥɧɢɯ ɪeɲeʃa ɡa ɞoɜoʂɧo ɫɢɝɭɪɧo ɢ eɤoɧoɦɢɱɧo ɬeɦeʂeʃe
ɲɢɩoɜɢɦa, ɧeɤaɞa ɞɪɜeɧɢɦ a ɞaɧaɫ ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɦaɬeɪɢjaɥa ɢ oɛɥɢɤa, ɤojɢ ɫe ɭɝɪaɻɭjɭ
ɛɪojɧɢɦ ɩoɫɬɭɩɰɢɦa ɡaɜɢɫɧɢɦ oɞ ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ oɩɪeɦa ɡa ɭɝɪaɻɢɜaʃe – ɭ ɬeɪeɧ ɱɢja
ɝɪaɻa ɢ ɫɜojɫɬɜa ɫɭ joɲ ɫɥoɠeɧɢjɢ – ɞoɲɥo ɫe ɞo ɛɪojɧɢɯ ɬɢɩoɜa ɲɢɩoɜa ɱɢja ɫe
ɤɥaɫɢɮɢɤaɰɢja ɢ ɩɪaɬeʄa ɪaɱɭɧɫɤa ɪeɲeʃa ɫɬaɥɧo ɩɪoɲɢɪɭjɭ ɢ ɞoɩɭʃɭjɭ, ɭɡ ɠeʂɭ ɢ
ɩoɬɪeɛɭ ɞa ɫe ɡa ɩɪaɤɫɭ ɪaɰɢoɧaɥɢɡɭjɭ. Taɤoɭɦeɫɬo ɪaɧɢje oɫɧoɜɧe ɩoɞeɥe ɲɢɩoɜa ɧa
ɭɬɢɫɧɭɬe (drivenɢɛɭɲeɧe (bored), aɤɬɭeɥɧa je ɤɥaɫɢɮɢɤaɰɢja ɧoɫeʄɢɯɲɢɩoɜa ɧɩɪ
Prakash,Sharma,1990; Tomlinson,Woodward,2008; Fleming et al.,2009; Viggiani et
al.,2012) ɧa ɬɢɩoɜe ɤojɢɦa je ɬɥo ɢɡɦeɲɬeɧo (displacement pilesɝeɧeɪaɥɧo drivenɢɥɢ
ɤojɢɦa je ɬɥo ɡaɦeʃeɧo (replacement ɬj. non-displacement piles ɝeɧeɪaɥɧo bored) a
ɩoɫɬoje ɢɤoɦɛɢɧaɰɢje oɜɢɯɬɢɩoɜa (parcial-displacementɫa ɩoɞɝɪɭɩaɦa ɡa ɫɜaɤɢɬɢɩ
Ʉaɤo je ɩoɡɧaɬo ɢɧɬeɪaɤɰɢja ɲɢɩa ɢ oɤoɥɧoɝ ɬɥa ɧoɫɢɜoɫɬ ɢɫɤaɡaɧa ɝɪaɧɢɱɧɢɦ ɢ
ɞoɡɜoʂeɧɢɦoɩɬeɪeʄeʃeɦɭɩoɝɥeɞɭɥoɦa ɬɥaɫɥeɝaʃe ɢɛoɱɧo ɩoɦeɪaʃe ɲɢɩaɡaɜɢɫɢ
oɞ ɬɢɩa, oɛɥɢɤa ɞɢɦeɧɡɢja ɢ ɤɪɭɬoɫɬɢ ɲɢɩa ɧaɱɢɧa ɭɝɪaɻɢɜaʃa ɫaɫɬaɜa ɫɬaʃa ɢ
ɫɜojɫɬaɜa ɬɥa ɜɪɫɬe oɩɬeɪeʄeʃa ɢ ɞɪ ɩa ɫɭ ɛɪojɧɢ aɭɬoɪɢ ɩɪɢɤaɡaɥɢ aɧaɥɢɡe ɫa
ɪeɲeʃɢɦa ɦeɬoɞɢɦaɡa ɪaɡɧe ɫɥɭɱajeɜeɤoja je ɬeɲɤo ɫɢɫɬeɦaɬɢɡoɜaɬɢAɧaɥɢɡaɦa
ɩoɧaɲaʃa ɲɢɩoɜa ɩojeɞɢɧaɱɧo – ɤɚɨ ɢ ɫɥɨɠɟɧɟ ɢɧɬeɪaɤɰɢje ɬɥɚ ɢ ɝɪɭɩa ɲɢɩoɜa ɫa
ɬeɦeʂɧɢɦ ɧaɝɥaɜɧɢɦ ɤoɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢjaɦa ɲɢɪoɤɢɯ ɢɥɢ ɭ ɧɨɜɢʁɟ ɜɪɟɦɟ ɜeoɦa ɜɢɫoɤɢɯ
oɛjeɤaɬa – ɩoɫɜeʄeɧe ɫɭ ɛɪojɧe ɩɭɛɥɢɤɚɰɢʁɟ oɞ oɧɢɯ ɤoje ɫe ɩo ɰɢɬɢɪaɧoɫɬɢ ɦoɝɭ
ɫɦaɬɪaɬɢ ɤɥaɫɢɱɧɢɦ (Poulos,Davis,1980) ɞo ɫaɜɪeɦeɧɢɯ ɩoɧoɜo oɪɢɝɢɧaɥɧɢɯ
(Guo,2013)ɤao ɢoɛɢɦɧa ɝeoɬeɯɧɢɱɤa ɩeɪɢoɞɢɤa.
ɉɪeɦa ʃɢɦa ɡa ɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe ɩojeɞɢɧaɱɧɢɯ ɲɢɩoɜa ɭ ɩɪaɤɫɢ ɫɭ aɮɢɪɦɢɫaɧɢ
ɩɪɢɫɬɭɩɢ i ɧa oɫɧoɜɭ ɩoɤaɡaɬeʂa ɮɢɡɢɱɤo-ɦeɯaɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɫɜojɫɬaɜa ɬɥa, oɞɪeɻeɧɢɯ
ɥaɛoɪaɬo-ɪɢjɫɤɢɢɥɢɤoɪeɥaɰɢjaɦa ɫa ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬɢɦa ɬeɪeɧɫɤɢɯɞɭɛɢɧɫɤɢɯɢɫɩɢɬɢɜaʃa,
(iiɬɡɜɞɢɧaɦɢɱɤɢɦɮoɪɦɭɥaɦa ɦeɻɭɡaɜɢɫɧoɫɬɢeɧeɪɝɢje ɩoɛɢjaʃa ɢɫɥeɝaʃa ɲɢɩoɜa,
(iiiɬɡɜɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɢɦ SPT, CPT ɢɥɢPMT ɪɟɲɟʃɢɦɚɩɪɟɤɨɤoɪeɥaɰɢja ɩeɧeɬɪaɰɢoɧɢɯ
oɬɩoɪa ɢɥɢ ɩɪɟɫɢɨɦɟɬɚɪɫɤɢɯ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ ɫa ɤaɩaɰɢɬeɬoɦ ɛaɡe ɢ oɦoɬaɱa ɲɢɩa ɢ ɤao
ɧɚʁɩɨɭɡɞɚɧɢʁɢ iv ɧa oɫɧoɜɭ oɩɢɬa ɩɪoɛɧɢɯ oɩɬeɪeʄeʃa ɲɢɩa ɤojɢɦa ɫe ɝɪaɧɢɱɧo
oɩɬeɪeʄeʃe ɥoɦa ɬɥa ɨɤɨ ɲɢɩɚ oɞɪeɻɭje ɫa ɞɢjaɝɪaɦa ɫɥeɝaʃa, ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚ-ɧɢɦ
ɩɪɨɰɟɞɭɪɚɦɚ
ɇa oɫɧoɜɭɩɪaɤɬɢɱɧɢɯɢɫɤɭɫɬaɜaɡa ɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe aɤɫɢjaɥɧo ɩɪɢɬɢɫɧɭɬɢɯɲɢɩoɜa
ɫɦaɬɪajɭ ɫe ɧajɩoɝoɞɧɢjɢɦ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɚ ɪeɲeʃa (iii ɧa oɫɧoɜɭ ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬa oɩɢɬa
ɩeɧeɬɪaɰɢje (CPTɦaʃe SPTɤojɢɦa ɫe ɩeɧeɬɪaɰɢoɧɢoɬɩoɪɢɞɢɪeɤɬɧo ɤoɪeɥɢɲɭɫa
oɬɩoɪoɦɧoɫɢɜoɲʄɭɬɥa ɛaɡe ɲɢɩa ɢoɬɩoɪoɦɬɪeʃa ɩo oɦoɬaɱɭɲɢɩa, a ɡa ɩɪoɜeɪɭ
ɩɪoɪaɱɭɧa ɩɪɢɦeʃɭjɭɫe oɩɢɬɢɩɪoɛɧoɝoɩɬeɪeʄeʃa (iv).
367
ɋɭɝeɫɬɢɜɧe ɢɧɬeɪɩɪeɬaɰɢje ɢ ɤoɪeɥaɰɢje ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬa oɩɢɬa ɩeɧeɬɪaɰɢje ɧɭɞe ɜɨɞɟʄɢ

aɭɬoɪɢ(Mayne et al.,2009) ɢɥɢRobertson,Cabal(2012) ɤojɢɡa ɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe ɲɢɩoɜa
ɧa oɫɧoɜɭ CPT oɬɩoɪa ɩɪeɩoɪɭɱɭje ɞeɰeɧɢjaɦa ɧajɲɢɪe ɩɪɢɦeʃɢɜaɧo ɪeɲeʃe
Bustamante,Gianeselli(1982), ɨɡɧɚɱɟɧɨ ɤɚɨ ɪɟɲɟʃɟ LCPC(1982) ɩɪɟɦɚ ɟɦɢɧɟɧɬɧɨʁ
ɢɧɫɬɢɬɭɰɢʁɢ (Laboratoire Central Ponts Et Chaussees, Paris) ɭ ɤɨʁɨʁ ʁɟ ɤɪɟɢɪɚɧɨ.
ɇaɪaɜɧo, aɤɬɭeɥɧa ɫɭɢɛɪojɧa ɬeoɪɢjɫɤo-eɤɫɩeɪɢɦeɧɬaɥɧa ɢɫɬɪaɠɢɜaʃa ɫa ɩɪeɞɥoɡɢɦa
oɩɬɢɦaɥɧɢɯ ɪeɲeʃa ɡa ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬe ɫɩeɰɢɮɢɱɧe ɫɥɭɱajeɜe. ɇɚ ɩɪɢɦɟɪ ɩɪeɝɥeɞaɧ
ɬaɛeɥaɪɧɢ ɩɪɢɤaɡ ɫaɜɪeɦeɧɢjɢɯ ɪeɲeʃa ɦeɬoɞa ɡa ɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe ɲɢɩoɜa
ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɬɢɩoɜa ɧa oɫɧoɜɭ oɬɩoɪa ɩeɧeɬɪaɰɢjɢ SPT i CPT ɭ ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦ
ɦaɬeɪɢjaɥɢɦa ɞajɭ Viggiani ɢɞɪ2012).
Ɂa ɲɢɩoɜa ɭɋɪɛɢjɢȼɭɤɢʄeɜɢʄɢɞɪ ɩoɪeɞɟ ɞɢɪeɤɬɧɢɯCPT ɪeɲeʃa ɢɭɡ
ɫaɜɪeɦeɧɭ ɫɬaɬɢɫɬɢɱɤɭ oɛɪaɞɭ ɩoɞaɬaɤa ɧaɥaɡɟ ɞa ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬɢ ɩɪoɛɧɢɯ oɩɬeɪeʄeʃa
ɩɪeɩoɪɭɱɭjɭɞɢɪeɤɬɧo CPT ɪeɲeʃe LCPC(1982) ɤao ɧajɩoɝoɞɧɢje ɡa ɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe
Ɏɪaɧɤɢɢɦeɝa-ɲɢɩoɜa ɭɥoɤaɥɧoɦɤoɯeɪeɧɬɧoɦɬɥɭ
ɍɫɜeɫɰɢɧaɰɢoɧaɥɧoɝɱaɫoɩɢɫaɩoɫɜeʄeɧoj aɤaɞeɦɢɤɭɋAɇɍȾɭɲaɧɭMɢɥoɜɢʄɭɨɜɚʁ
ɟɦɢɧɟɧɬɧɢɚɭɬɨɪ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɨʁɟɫɜoje ɞɢɪeɤɬɧo CPT ɪeɲeʃe Mɢɥoɜɢʄɧa oɫɧoɜɭ
ɩɪoɛɧɢɯoɩɬeɪeʄeʃa ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯɲɢɩoɜa ɭɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦɦaɬeɪɢjaɥɢɦa ɧa ɥoɤaɰɢjaɦa
ɭ ɋɪɛɢjɢ ɏɪɜaɬɫɤoj Ƚɪɱɤoj Ȼeɥɝɢjɢ ɋȺȾ ɢ Ʉaɧaɞɢ ɩoɪeɞɢ ɝa ɫa ɪeɲeʃɢɦa
Meyerhof(1956), Mohan,Kumar ɢ LCPC ɢ ɩoɤaɡɭje ɞa ʃeɝoɜo ɪaɱɭɧɫɤo
ɪeɲeʃe ɧajɦaʃe oɞɫɬɭɩa oɞ ɬeɪeɧɫɤɢɯ ɪeɡɭɥɬaɬa ɩɪoɛɧoɝ oɩɬeɪeʄeʃa – ɫa oɞɧoɫoɦ
eɤɫɩeɪɢɦeɧɬaɥɧoɝɢɪaɱɭɧɫɤoɝɝɪaɧɢɱɧoɝoɩɬeɪeʄeʃa ɭɝɪaɧɢɰaɦa 0,88-1,08 a ɩɪaɬɢɝa
LCPCɭɝɪaɧɢɰaɦa 0,58-2,43.
Ʉoɪɢɫɧo je ɭoɱɢɬɢ ɞa ʁɟ ɩoɫɥe ɝoɞɢɧa ɩɪɢɦeɧe ɪeɲeʃa LCPC ɢɫɬa
ɢɧɫɬɢɬɭɰɢja ɨɞ Laboratoire Ponts Et Chaussees) ɤɪeɢɪaɥa ɢɧɨɜɢɪɚɧɨ ɪeɲeʃe
LPC(2012 ɡa oɞɪeɻɢɜaʃe ɝɪaɧɢɱɧoɝ oɩɬeɪeʄeʃa ɪaɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɬɢɩoɜa ɲɢɩoɜa ɭ
oɫɧoɜɧɢɦɬɢɩoɜɢɦa ɬɥa (Frank,2013; Briaud,2013ɤoje ɫe ɫɦaɬɪa ɤoɧɡɢɫɬeɧɬɧɢjɢɦɡa
ɩɪɢɦeɧɭoɞɜaɪɢjaɧɬe LCPC(1982) aɥɢɫe ɭɩɪaɤɫɢɬeɤaɮɢɪɦɢɲe.
Ɂa ɪaɱɭɧɫɤɭaɧaɥɢɡɭɝeoɬeɯɧɢɱɤɢɯɭɫɥoɜa ɬeɦeʂeʃa ɩɥɚɧɢɪɚɧɟ 22-eɬaɠɧe ɩɨɫɥɨɜɧɨ-
ɫɬɚɦɛɟɧɟɤɭɥɟ ɜɢɫɢɧe 92 m ɭɇɢɲɭ (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄɢɞɪ aɭɬoɪɢoɜoɝa ɪaɞa ɫɭ
ɫoɮɬɜeɪɫɤɢ ɩɚɤɟɬ GeoData2 (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ ɡD ɝHRɦHɯDɧɢɱɤH ɩɪRɪDɱɭɧH
ɫɬDɛɢɥɧRɫɬɢ ɢ ɞHɮRɪɦDɰɢMD ɬɥD ɩɥɢɬɤɢɯ ɬHɦHʂD ɢ ɲɢɩRɜD ɤRɫɢɧD ɢ ɩDɞɢɧD
ɩRɬɩRɪɧɢɯɤRɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢMDRɞɛHɬRɧDɝɚɛɢɨɧɚɢDɪɦɢɪDɧRɝɬɥD ɩɪɨɲɢɪɢɥɢ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦ
ɞɢjaɝɪaɦa ɡa ɞɢɪɟɤɬɚɧɢɡɛɨɪɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɢɞɭɛɢɧɚ ɛɭɲeɧɢɯ ɲɢɩoɜa ɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɭ ɧoɫɢɜoɫɬ
ɩɪeɦa jɭɝoɫɥoɜeɧɫɤoɦ ɉɪaɜɢɥɧɢɤɭ ɢ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɢɦ CPT-ɪeɲeʃɢɦa LCPC
(1982), Mɢɥoɜɢʄɢ LPC(2012)ɤDRɢɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɨɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɲɢɩRɜDɭɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɦ
ɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɭɦɭ ɩɪHɦD ɪHɲHʃɢɦD 5DQGROSK:URWK ɢ 3RXORV'DYLV – ɫɚ
ɝɪɚɮɢɱɤɢɦɩɪɢɤɚɡɨɦɦɟɻɭɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬɢɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɢɞɭɛɢɧɟɲɢɩɚ
ɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦɬɥɭɤɚɨɢɦɟɻɭɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬ ɨɜɢɯɭɬɢɰɚʁɚɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɲɢɩɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦɬɥɭ
ɍ oɜoɦ ɪaɞɭ ɫaɠeɬo ɫe ɩɪɢɤaɡɭjɭ ɢ ɮoɪɦaɥɧo ɩoɪeɞe ɩoɦeɧɭɬa ɡɚ ɩɪɚɤɫɭ ɩɨɞɨɛɧɚ
ɞɢɪeɤɬɧa CPT ɪeɲeʃa – ɲɢɪoɤo aɮɢɪɦɢɫaɧo LCPC ɧɨɜɨ LPC(2012 ɢ
ɧoɜoɩɪeɞɥoɠeɧo Mɢɥoɜɢʄ – a ɩɪɢɤaɡɭjɭɫe ɢ GeoData2 ɞɢjaɝɪaɦɢɩɪeɦa oɜɢɦ
ɪeɲeʃɢɦa ɡa ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɨɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe ɲɢɩoɜa ɜeɥɢɤoɝɩɪeɱɧɢɤa ɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɠeʂeɧɟ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɭ ɫɥojeɜɢɬoɦ ɬɥɭ ɤojɢ ɤoɧɫɬɪɭɤɬeɪɭ ɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ ɨɥɚɤɲɚɜɚʁɭ ɢɡɛɨɪ ɢ ɪɚɡɪɚɞɭ
ɪɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɟɜaɪɢjaɧɬɟ ɪeɲeʃa ɡa ɞɭɛoɤo ɬeɦeʂeʃe.
368
ȾɂɊ(Ʉ7ɇ$&37-Ɋ(ɒ(ȵA LCPC(1982), 0ɂɅ2ȼɂȶɂ/PC(2012)
ɂɫɬɪDɠɢɜDʃD ɩRɤDɡɭMɭ ɞD ɫɭ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɚ &37 ɪHɲHʃD ɫɭɩHɪɢRɪɧD ɭ RɞɧRɫɭ ɧD
ɤRɧɜHɧɰɢRɧDɥɧHɦHɬRɞHɡDɩɪRɰHɧɭDɤɫɢMDɥɧRɝɤDɩDɰɢɬHɬDɲɢɩDɩɪHɫɜHɝDɡDɬRɲɬR&37
ɞDMH ɤRɧɬɢɧɭDɥɧɢ ɩɪRɮɢɥ RɬɩRɪD ɬɥD ɞRɧHɤɥH ɫɥɢɱɧRɝ ɤDR ɩɪɢ ɭɬɢɫɤɢɜDʃɭ ɲɢɩD ɧɚ
ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɱɟɝɚ ɫɟ ɤɚɩɚɰɢɬɟɬɢ ɬɥɚ ɭ ɡɨɧɚɦɚ ɛɚɡɟ ɢ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɨ ɤɨɪɟɥɢɲɭ ɫɚ
ɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢɨɧɢɦ RɬɩRɪɢɦɚ ɬɥD ɜɪɯɚ &37 ɤRɧɭɫD q c ɭ ɨɜɢɦ ɡɨɧɚɦɚ ɭɜRɻHʃHɦ
ɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɢɯ ɪHɞɭɤɰɢRɧɢɯ ɤRHɮɢɰɢMHɧDɬD ɡɛRɝ HɮHɤɬD ɪDɡɦHɪH ɢ ɩɪDɬHʄɢɯ ɭɬɢɰDMD –
ɩɪɟɦɚɨɤɨɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ.
ɌɚɤɨɫɟɝɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɨɡɚɢɡɦɟɪɟɧɟɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢɨɧɟRɬɩRɪɟɬɥDɜɪɯɭ&37ɤRɧɭɫDɭɡɨɧɚɦɚɛɚɡɟ
(q cb ɢ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɚ q cs ) DɤɫɢMDɥɧR ɩɪɢɬɢɫɧɭɬRɝ ɲɢɩɚ ɭ ɯɨɦɨɝɟɧɨɦ ɬHɪHɧɭ, ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɢɦ
ɤɨɪɟɥɚɰɢʁɚɦɚɞɨɛɢʁɚʁɭɢɡɪɚɡɢɡDɝɪDɧɢɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɬɥDɩRMHɞɢɧɢɰɢɩRɜɪɲɢɧHɛDɡHɲɢɩD
(q b ɢɝɪDɧɢɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɬɪHʃHɦɩRMHɞɢɧɢɰɢɩRɜɪɲɢɧHRɦRɬDɱDɲɢɩDq s ), ɤɨʁɢɫɭɩɨɝɨɞɧɢ
ɡɚ ɩɪɢɤɚɡ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɭ ɢ ɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɟ ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ɡɚ ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɟ ɬɢɩɨɜɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɭ
ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦ
ɬɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ
ɬɥɚ
ɉɪɟɦɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɢɦɫɢɦɛɨɥɢɦɚɡɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɢ ɬɟɪɟɧɨɞ i = 2...ʁn ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɢɥɢɡɚɩɪɚɤɫɭ
ɩɨɝɨɞɧɢɯn = 10-ɥɚɦɟɥɚɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɚɫɢɥɚɨɫɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚV aj ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɨɝɲɢɩɚ
ɫɚɛɚɡɨɦɧɚɤɨɬɢ(z) ɩɨʁɚɜɟɫɥɨʁɚʁ ɦɨɝɭʄɟʁ ·Qɦɨɠɟɫɟɢɡɪɚɡɢɬɢɤɚɨ
௜ୀ௝ିଵ
‫ݍ‬௕௝ ‫ܣ‬௕௝ ‫ݍ‬௦௜ ‫ܣ‬௦௜
ܸ௔௝ = + ෍ (1)
‫ܨ‬௦௕ ‫ܨ‬௦௦
௜ୀଵ
ɝɞɟɫɭȺ bʁ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚɛɚɡɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚɫɥɨʁɭɥɚɦɟɥɢʁ, A si ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚɨɦɨɬɚɱɚɲɢɩɚɭ

ɫɥɨʁɭi, F sb ɮɚɤɬɨɪɫɢɝɭɪɧɨɫɬɢɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɥɨɦɚɬɥɚɢɫɩɨɞɛɚɡɟ F ss ɮɚɤɬɨɪɫɢɝɭɪɧɨɫɬɢ
ɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɫɦɢɰɚʃɚɬɪɟʃɟɦɩɨɨɦɨɬɚɱɭɲɢɩɚɨɛɢɱɧɨɤɨɧɫɬɚɧɬɚɡɚɫɜɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɟɬɥɚ).
Ɋeɲeʃe LCPC(1982) (Bustamante,Gianeselli,1982)
2ɜR ɪHɲHʃH ɞɭɠH Rɞ ɝRɞɢɧD ɩɪHɞɫɬDɜʂD ɝɥDɜɧɢ ɞɢɪHɤɬɧɢ &37 ɦHɬRɞ ɢɡɜHɞHɧ ɭ
Rɤɜɢɪɭ/&3&ɧDRɫɧRɜɭDɧDɥɢɡHRɩɢɬDRɩɬHɪHʄHʃDɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɬɢɩRɜDɲɢɩRɜDɭ
ɪɚɡɧɢɦ ɬɢɩRɜɢɦa ɬɥD ɩD MH ɩRɝRɞDɧ ɡD ɬDɤɜɭ ɩɪɢɦHɧɭ – ɭɡ ɫDɝɥDɫɧRɫɬ ɪDɱɭɧɫɤɢɯ ɢ
ɟɤɫɩɟɪɢɦɟɧɬɚɥɧɢɯ ɪHɡɭɥɬDɬD ɨɛɢɱɧɨ ɨɰɟʃɢɜɚɧɭ ɤɚɨ ɩɨɜɨʂɧɭ ɧɩɪ Robertson,Cabal,
2012; ȼɭɤɢʄeɜɢʄ ɢɞɪ,2018; Mɢɥoɜɢʄ,2018).
ɁDɩHɧHɬɪDɰɢRɧɢRɬɩRɪq cb ɭɫɜDMDɫHɩɪRɫHɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɩɪRɞɢɪDʃɭ&37ɤRɧɭɫDɤɪRɡɡRɧɭ
(z±1,5BɛDɡHɲɢɩDɩɪHɱɧɢɤDB a ɪɟɲɟʃɟʁɟɞɚɬɨɡɚɬɢɩRɜDɲɢɩRɜDɭɬɢɩRɜDɬɥD,
ɩɪɟɦɚɌɚɛɟɥɚɦɚɢɭɤɨʁɢɦɚɫɭɩɪɟɞɥɨɠɟɧɢɪɟɞɭɤɰɢɨɧɢɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢk c Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ
ɢĮɫɚɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɢɦɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɦɚ ɛɨɱɧɨɝɬɪɟʃɚf ɪ (Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ 2), ɚɝɪDɧɢɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɢɬɥDɩR
MHɞɢɧɢɰɢɩRɜɪɲɢɧHɛDɡHɲɢɩDq b ɢRɦRɬDɱDɲɢɩDq s ɪɚɱɭɧɚʁɭɫɟɤɚɨ
q b = q cb k c ɢq s = q cs /Į f ɪ (2 )
369
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ. LCPC(1982) – ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢ kc ɡɚɛɚɡɭɲɢɩɚ

Table 1. LCPC(1982) – factors kc for pile base (Robertson,Cabal,2012)
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ2. LCPC(1982) – ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢĮ ɢɧɚʁɜɟʄɢɨɬɩɨɪɢɬɪɟʃɚ ɩɨɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ fɪ

Table 2. LCPC(1982) – coefficients Į and limit of shaft resistance fɪ (Robertson,Cabal,2012)
ɊHɲHʃHɆɢɥɨɜɢʄ (2018)
ɋɜɨʁɟ ɞɢɪHɤɬɧR &37 ɪHɲHʃH 0ɢɥRɜɢʄ(2018) ʁɟ ɩɪɟɞɥɨɠɢɨ ɧD RɫɧRɜɭ ɩɪRɛɧɢɯ
RɩɬHɪHʄHʃD ɪDɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɲɢɩRɜD ɭ ɪDɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦ ɦDɬHɪɢMDɥɢɦD ɧD ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦ
ɦɟɪɢɞɢʁɚɧɢɦɚ ɩRɪHɞɢ ɝD ɫD ɧɚɩɪɟɞ ɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɢɦ ɞɪɭɝɢɦ ɪHɲHʃɢɦD ɢ ɩRɤDɡɭMH ɞD ɨɜɨ
ɪDɱɭɧɫɤRɪHɲHʃHɧDMɦDʃHRɞɫɬɭɩDRɞɬHɪHɧɫɤɢɯɪHɡɭɥɬDɬDɩɪRɛɧRɝRɩɬHɪHʄHʃD– ɫD
RɞɧRɫRɦHɤɫɩHɪɢɦHɧɬDɥɧRɝɢɪDɱɭɧɫɤRɝɝɪDɧɢɱɧRɝRɩɬHɪHʄHʃDɭɝɪDɧɢɰDɦD-1,08
D ɩɪDɬɢ ɝD /&3& ɭ ɝɪDɧɢɰDɦD -2,43. ɂɡ ɩɪɟɞɥɨɠɟɧɨɝ ɩɪɨɢɡɢɥɚɡɢ ɞɚ ʁɟ
ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɨ ɪɟɲɟʃɟ ɪɟɚɥɧɢʁɟ ɨɞ ɞɪɭɝɢɯ ɫɚ ɤɨʁɢɦɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɪɟɻɟɧɨ ɞɚ ʁɟ ɩɪɢɦɟʃɢɜɨ ɛɟɡ
ɨɛɡɢɪɚɧɚɬɢɩɨɜɟɲɢɩɨɜɚɢɬɥɚ ɚ ɞɚʁɟɡɚɩɪɢɦɟɧɭɧɚʁʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜɧɢʁɟɤɚɤɨɫɥɟɞɢ
370
ɁDɩHɧHɬɪDɰɢRɧɢRɬɩRɪq cb ɭɫɜDMDɫHɩɪRɫHɱɧɢRɬɩRɪ&37ɤRɧɭɫDɤɪRɡɡRɧɭɢɫɩɨɞ ɛDɡH

ɲɢɩD, ɪɟɲɟʃɟʁɟɞɚɬɨɫɚɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɦɚɪɟɞɭɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɚɬɚ Į ɪ ɢĮ sk ɧɚɋɥɢɰɢ1
ɚɝɪDɧɢɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɢɬɥDɩRMHɞɢɧɢɰɢɩRɜɪɲɢɧHɛDɡHq b ɢRɦRɬDɱDq s ɪɚɱɭɧɚʁɭɫɟɤɚɨ
q b = q cb Į ɪ ɢq s = q cs /Į sk (3)
Į ɪ ɡɚ
ɡɡɚɛɚɡɭɢĮ
ɚɛɚɡɭ ɢ Į skk ɡɡɚ
ɡɚɨɦɨɬɚɱɲɢɩɚ
ɚɨɦ
ɨɦɨɬ
ɨɦɨɬɚɱ
ɨɬ ɚ ɲɢɩɚ
qcb (MPa) qcs (Mpa)

ɋɥɢɤɚ. Ɇɢɥɨɜɢʄ(2018) – ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢ Įɪ ɡɚɛɚɡɭɢĮsk ɡɚɨɦɨɬɚɱɲɢɩɚ
Figure 1. Milovic(2018) – factors Įɪ for pile base ɢĮsk for shaft resistance
ɉɪɟɦɚ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɨɦ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɚ ɨɜɨɝ ɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɨɝ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ʁɟ ʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜɧɢʁɚ ɨɞ ɚɮɢɪɦɢɫɚɧɨɝ
ɪɟɲɟʃɚLCPC(1982) ɫɚɤɨʁɢɦɝɚɚɭɬɨɪɩɨɪɟɞɢɭɡɧɚɥɚɡ ɞɚʁɟɢɫɚɝɥɚɫɧɨɫɬɫɚɩɪɨɛɧɢɦ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɢɦɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɛɨʂɚ Ɂɚ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɟ ɨɜɨɝ ɱɥɚɧɤɚ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɢɪɚɧɚ ʁɟ ɫɚɝɥɚɫɧɨɫɬ
ɪɟɞɭɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɚɬɚɩɪɟɦɚ ɨɜɚɞɜɚ ɪɟɲɟʃɚɢɭɨɱɟɧɨ ʁɟɞɚɫɭɤɪɢɜɟɆɢɥɨɜɢʄɚ
ɧɟɤɚ ɜɪɫɬɚ ɥɢɧɢʁɚ ɬɪɟɧɞɚ LCPC-ɡɨɧɚ ɡɚ ɫɜɢɯ ɨɫɚɦ ɬɢɩɨɜɚ ɬɥɚ ɚ ɡɚ ɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɭ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɭ
ɧɚɻɟɧɢɫɭɢʃɢɯɨɜɢɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɢɢɡɪɚɡɢ
Ɋeɲeʃe LPC(2012) (Briaud,2013)
ɉɨɫɥɟɝɨɞɢɧɚɢɧɫɬɪɭɦɟɧɬɚɥɢɡɨɜɚɧɨɝɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɢɯɲɢɩɨɜɚɮɪɚɧɰɭɫɤɢɦ
ɫɬɚɧɞɚɪɞoɦ AFNOR NF P94-262 ɤɚɨ ɧɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɢɦ ɚɧɟɤɫɨɦ EC7 ɧɨɪɦɢɪɚɧɨ ʁɟ
ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɟ ɚɤɫɢʁɚɥɧɨɝ ɢ ɬɪɚɧɫɜɟɪɡɚɥɧɨɝ ɤɚɩɚɰɢɬɟɬɚ ɢ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɩɪɟ ɫɜɟɝɚ
ɪɟɲɟʃɢɦɚ ɧɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɨɩɢɬɚ ɩɪɟɫɢɨɦɟɬɪɨɦ LPC-PMT) ɢ ɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢʁɟ ɤɨɧɭɫɨɦ (LPC-
CPT). OɛɚɪɟɲɟʃɚɨɛɪɚɡɥɚɠɭɜɨɞɟʄɢɚɭɬɨɪɢBustamante et al.,2009; Frank,ɚɫɚɠɟɬɢ
ɩɪɢɤɚɡɡɚɩɪɚɤɫɭɞɚʁɟBriaud(2013). ɊɟɲɟʃɟLPC(2012) – ɢɥɢLPC-CPT – ɧɢʁɟɨɝɪɚɧɢɱɟɧɨ
ɬɢɩɨɦɲɢɩɚɧɢɬɢɬɢɩɨɦɬɥɚ, ɨɫɢɦɤɚɞʁɟɨɬɩɨɪɤɨɧɭɫɭɜɟʄɢɨɞkN.
ɁDɩHɧHɬɪDɰɢRɧɢRɬɩRɪq cb ɭɫɜDMDɫHɩɪRɫHɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɩɪRɞɢɪDʃɭ&37ɤRɧɭɫDɤɪRɡɡRɧɭ
(z+1,5B ɛDɡH ɲɢɩD ɩɪHɱɧɢɤD B a ɪɟɲɟʃɟ ʁɟ ɞɚɬɨ ɡɚɬɢɩRɜD ɲɢɩRɜD ɭ ɨɫɧɨɜɧɢɯ
ɬɢɩRɜDɬɥD ɩɨɞɟʂɟɧɢɯɭɭɤɭɩɧɨɝɪɭɩɚɩɪɟɦɚɱɜɪɫɬɨʄɢɫɬɚʃɭɬɥɚ, ɩɪɟɦɚɌɚɛɟ-
ɥɚɦɚ3ɢ ɋɥɢɰɢɁɚɬɢɩɬɥɚɤɥɚɫɢɮɢɤɨɜɚɧɩɪɟɦɚɌɚɛɟɥɢɢɬɢɩɲɢɩɚɭɌɚɛɟɥɢ
ɩɪɟɞɥɨɠɟɧɢɫɭɪɟɞɭɤɰɢɨɧɢɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢk c ɡɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɛɚɡɟ, ɭɌɚɛɟɥɢɮɪɢɤɰɢɨɧɢ
ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬ Įɢɧɚʁɜɟʄɚ ɩɪɢɦɟʃɢɜɚɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɛɨɱɧɨɝɬɪɟʃɚf lim ɫɚɨɡɧɚɤɨɦQ1 ɞɨ Q3)
ɤɪɢɜɟɡɚɤɨʁɭɫɚɋɥɢɤɟɬɪɟɛɚɨɱɢɬɚɬɢɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɚf soil ɚɝɪDɧɢɱɧɢRɬɩRɪɢɬɥD
ɩRMHɞɢɧɢɰɢɩRɜɪɲɢɧHɛDɡHɲɢɩDq b ɢRɦRɬDɱDɲɢɩDq s ) ɪɚɱɭɧɚʁɭɫɟɤɚɨ
371
q b = q cb k c ɢq s = Įf soil f lim (4)
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ3. LPC(2012) – ɤɥɚɫɢɮɢɤɚɰɢʁɚɬɥɚɡɚLPC(2012) ɪɟɲɟʃɟ

Table 3. LPC(2012) – soil clasification for LPC(2012) method (Briaud,2013)
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ4. LPC(2012) – ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢ kc ɡɚɛɚɡɭɲɢɩɚ

Table 4. LPC(2012) – factors kc for pile base (Briaud,2013)
372
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ5. LPC(2012) – ɮɪɢɤɰɢɨɧɢɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɡɚɨɦɨɬɚɱɲɢɩɚ

Table 5. LPC(2012) – friction parameters for shaft resistance (Briaud,2013)
qcs (MPa)
ɋɥɢɤɚ2. LPC(2012) – ɛɨɱɧɨɬɪɟʃɟ fsoil ɭɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬɢɨɞqcs ɭɡɨɧɢ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɚ ɲɢɩɚ
Figure 2. LPC(2012) – soil friction fsoil vs. qcs (Briaud,2013)
ɉɊɂɆȿɇȺȾɂɊ(Ʉ7ɇɂɏ CPT-Ɋ(ɒ(ȵ$ɍɋɅɈȳȿȼɂɌɈɆɌɅɍ

ɫɬɚɦɛɟɧɟ ɤɭɥɟ ɜɢɫɢɧe 92 m ɭ ɇɢɲɭ (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ ɢ ɞɪ,2019), aɭɬoɪɢ oɜoɝa ɪaɞa
ɩɪɨɲɢɪɢɥɢ ɫɭ ɫoɮɬɜeɪɫɤɢ ɩɚɤɟɬ GeoData2 (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ,2005) ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦ
ɞɢjaɝɪaɦa ɡa ɞɢɪɟɤɬɚɧɢɡɛɨɪɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɢɞɭɛɢɧɚ ɛɭɲeɧɢɯɲɢɩoɜa ɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɭ ɧoɫɢɜoɫɬ
ɩɪeɦa jɭɝoɫɥoɜeɧɫɤoɦ ɉɪaɜɢɥɧɢɤɭ ɢ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɢɦ CPT-ɪeɲeʃɢɦa LCPC
(1982), MɢɥoɜɢʄɢLPC(2012). Ɋɚɱɭɧɫɤɢɯ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɞɨɢɫɬɪɚɠɟɧɟɞɭɛɢɧɟ
30 m Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ ɢɡɞɟʂɟɧɨʁɟɭɭɤɭɩɧɨɥɚɦɟɥɚɚ ɭɜɨɻɟʃɟɦɫɜɚɤɨɝɨɞɨɩɢɫɚɧɢɯɪɟɲɟʃɚ
ɢɡɪɚɡɢ-ɭɨɩɲɬɭʁɟɞɧɚɱɢɧɭɚɭɬɨɦɚɬɢɡɨɜɚɧɢɦ ɬɚɛɟɥɚɪɧɢɦɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɢɦɚɞɨɛɢʁɚʁɭ
ɫɟɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢV a ) ɲɢɩɚɫɚɛɚɡɨɦɧɚɭɞɧɭɫɜɚɤɟɥɚɦɟɥɟɭ ɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɢɞɭɛɢɧɟ
ɢɧɟɤɨɥɢɤɨɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɱɧɢɯɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɲɢɩɚɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɱɟɝɚɫɟɤɪɟɢɪɚʁɭɢɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢ
ɡɚɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟɲɢɩɨɜɚɋɥɢɤɚ
373
ɉɨɬɪɟɛɧɢ ɩɨɤɚɡɚɬɟʂɢ ɫɬɚʃɚ ɢ ɫɜɨʁɫɬɚɜɚ ɬɥɚ q c ) ɭ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚ ɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɢ ɫɭ CPT

ɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢʁɚɦɚ ɞɨɞɭɛɢɧɟɞɨɤɨʁɟɫɟɞɨɩɪɥɨ ɩɨɞɞɟʁɫɬɜɨɦkN ɚɧɚɧɢɠɟɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭ
ɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɢɯɤɨɪɟɥɚɰɢʁɚɫɚɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚSPT ɢɥɚɛɨɪɚɬɨɪɢʁɫɤɢɯɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ.
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ6. Ƚɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɢɫɜɨʁɫɬɜɚɬɥɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚ (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄɢɞɪ)

Table 6. The geometry of the layers of terrain and soil properties in layers
ɋɥɨʁ z [m] h [m] J ef [kN/m3 ] c' [kPa] M ' [°] q c [MPa]
1 ɒʂɭɧɱɚɧɢʁɚɫɬɭɤ 1,00 1,00 11,0 0 35 20
2 ɒʃɭɧɚɤɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬ 5,80 4,80 11,0 0 33 20
3 Ƚɥɢɧɚɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɚ 10,80 5,00 10,0 25 20 3
4 ɉɟɫɚɤɥɚɩɨɪɨɜɢɬ 16,80 6,00 10,5 10 31 10
5 Ƚɥɢɧɚɥɚɩɨɪɨɜɢɬɚ 28,00 11,20 10,5 20 28 12
ɋɥɢɤɚ3. Ⱦɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɡɚɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟɲɢɩɨɜɚɩɪɟɦɚɩɪɢɦɟʃɟɧɢɦɪɟɲɟʃɢɦɚ
(ɚ)-(d)
Figure 3. Diagrams for dimensioning the pile according to the applied solutions (a)-(d)
374
ЗАКЉУЧНЕ АПОМЕНЕ
Ⱥɤɬɭɟɥɧɚɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɚ CPT-ɪɟɲɟʃɚɫɚɠɟɬɨɫɭɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɚɩɪɟɫɜɟɝɚɡɚɩɪɚɤɬɢɱɧɭɩɪɢɦɟɧɭ
ɢɦɚʁɭʄɢɭɜɢɞɭɪɟ ɥɚɬɢɜɧɨɱɟɫɬɟɝɪɭɛɟ
ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɟ
ɲɢɩɨɜɚɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɧɢɯSPT
ɢɥɢ CPT ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ ɛɟɡ ʃɢɯɨɜɢɯ ɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɢɯ ɢɧɬɟɪɩɪɟɬɚɰɢʁɚ ɢ ɤɨɪɟɥɚɰɢʁɚ GeoData2
ɞɢjaɝɪaɦɢɋɥɢɤɚ3) ɨɦɨɝɭʄɚɜɚʁɭɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɨɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe ɲɢɩoɜa ɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɠeʂe-
ɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɭ ɫɥojeɜɢɬoɦ ɬɥɭ ɲɬɨ ɤoɧɫɬɪɭɤɬeɪɭ ɛɢɬɧɨ ɨɥɚɤɲɚɜɚ ɢɡɛɨɪ ɢ ɪɚɡɪɚɞɭ
ɪɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɟɜaɪɢjaɧɬɟɪeɲeʃa ɡa ɞɭɛoɤo ɬeɦeʂeʃe. ɉɨɪɟɻɟʃɟɦɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɚ(a-d) ɦɨɠɟ
ɫɟɨɰɟɧɢɬɢ ɞɚɫɟɪɟɲɟʃɚɡɚɞɚɬɢɫɥɭɱɚʁɛɢɬɧɨɧɟɪɚɡɥɢɤɭʁɭɤɚɨɢɞɚɫɟɩɪɟɦɚɉɪɚɜɢɥ-
ɧɢɤɭɞɨɛɪɨɫɥɚɠɭ ɫɚLPC(2012), ɤɨʁɟɫɟɦɨɠɟɫɦɚɬɪɚɬɢɦɟɪɨɞɚɜɧɢɦ ɍ ɩɪɚɤɫɢ,
ɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɚ ɫɚɦɨɞɟɪɧɢɦɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɢɦɪɟɲɟʃɢɦɚɭɩɭʄɭʁɭɧɩɪɧɚɬɨɥɟɪɚɧɬɧɭɫɚɝɥɚɫɧɨɫɬ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɉɪɚɜɢɥɧɢɤɭ ɢ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɪɚɫɬɭʄɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɩɪɢ ɤɨʁɨʁ ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦ
ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɲɢɩɚ(Plaxis 3D Foundation) ɩɪɟɥɚɡɢɭɤɪɢɜɨɥɢɧɢʁɫɤɢɞɟɨ ɇɚɜɟɞɟɧɚɪɟɲɟʃɚ,
ɧɚɪɚɜɧɨɜɚɠɟɡɚɲɢɩɨɜɟɫɚɦɰɟ ɧɚɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱɟɧɢɦɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɢɦɨɞɫɬɨʁɚʃɢɦɚ.
ɅɂɌȿɊȺɌɍɊȺɂɊȿɎȿɊȿɇɐȿ
AFNOR NF P94-262 (2012): Justification des ouvrages géotechniques, Normes d’application

nationale de l’Eurocode 7, Fondations profondes, Paris.
Briaud, J.L.(2013): Geotechnical engineering: unsaturated and saturated soils, John Wiley & Sons, NY.
Bustamante,M.,Gianeselli,L.(1982): Pile bearing capacity prediction by means of static penetrometer
CPT, Proc. of the 2nd Europ. Symposium on Penetracion Testing, Amsterdam, pp.493-500.
Bustamante,M.,Gambin,M.&Gianeselli,M.(2009): Pile design at failure using the Ménard pressuremeter:
an up-date, Proc. of the Int. Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo’09, Orlando, Florida.
Fleming,K. et al.(2009): Piling Engineering,Taylɨr&Francis, London, p.30.pp.578-579.
Frank, R. (2013). Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar,Georgia Tech, Atlanta.
Guo,W.D.(2013): Theory and Practice of Pile Foundations, CRC Press, London.
Ɇɚ\QH,P.W. et al.(2009): Geomaterial behavior and testing, Proceedings of the 17th Int.Conf. on SMGE
(Hamza,M. et al., eds.), Vol.4, Alexandria, IOS Press, Rotterdam, p.2826.
0LORYLü'1RVLYRVWãLSRYD– teorijske i terenske metode, *UDÿHYLQVNLPDWHULMDOLL
konstrukcije, 61, 1, str.15-26.
Potts,D.M.(2003): Numerical analysis – a virtual dream or practical reality?, Geotechnique, 53, 6,
London, pp.535-573.
Poulos,H.G.,Davis,E.H.(1980): Pile Foundation Analysis and Design, John Wiley&Sons, New York.
Prakash,S.,Sharma,H.D.(1990): Pile Foundations in Engineering Practice, John Wiley, NY, p.36.
3UDYLOQLNRWHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DWHPHOMHQMHJUDÿHYLQVNLKREMHNDWDSl. list SFRJ, br.15/1990.
Randolph,M.F.,Wroth,C.P.(1978): Analysis of deformation of vertically loaded piles, Journal
Geot.Eng. Division, ASCE, Vol.104, GT12, pp.1465-1488.
Robertson,P:K.,Cabal,K.L.(2012): Guide to CPT for Geotechnical Engineering, Gregg Drilling &
Testing Inc., Signal Hill, California.
SamardakoviüM.(1996): Geomehaniþki programski sistemi GeoData1 i GeoData2, Zbornik radova
Meÿunarodnog nauþnog skupa Pravci razvoja geotehnike, RGF, Beograd, str.395-404.
6DPDUGDNRYLü0'LPHQ]LRQLVDQMHRVQRRSWHUHüHQRJãLSDXYLãHVORMQRPWOXZbornik radova
VDYHWRYDQMDÄ*HRWHKQLþNLDVSHNWLJUDÿHYLQDUVWYD³, SGIT SCG, Kopaonik, str.295-300.
6DPDUGDNRYLü0 ɢɞɪ(2019): *HRWHKQLþNLXVORYLL]JUDGQMHVWDPEHQLKLSoslovnih objekata br.33-36
kompleksa "Novi Niš" na KP 6350/1 KO Niš-Bubanj, GeoSol DOO, Niš, 249 strana.
Tomlinson,M.,Woodward,J.(2008): Pile Design and Costruction Practice, Taylor&Francis, pp.10-11.
Viggiani,C. et al.(2012): Piles and Pile Foundations, Spon Press, London, p.13.
9XNLüHYLü0HWDO(YDOXDWLRQRIPHWKRGVIRUSUHGLFWLQJD[LDOFDSDFLW\Rf jacked-in and
driven piles in cohesive soils, *UDÿHYLQDU, 70, 8, Zagreb, pp.685-693.
375
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.154.04
ɉɊɈɊȺɑɍɇɋɅȿȽȺȵȺ
ȺɄɋɂȳȺɅɇɈɉɊɂ7ɂɋɇɍ7ɂɏɒɂɉ2ȼ$
ɍɋɅɈȳȿȼɂɌɈȳȿɅȺɋɌɂɑɇɈȳɋɊȿȾɂɇɂ
ɋɥɨɛɨɞɚɧɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄɆɢɪɨʂɭɛɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ
"GeoSol" ȾɈɈɡɚɝɪɚɻɟɜɢɧɫɤɭ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɤɭɇɢɲgeosolnis@yahoo.com
ɊȿɁɂɆ(
Ɂɚ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɭ ɭ ɩɪɚɤɫɢ ɫɚɠɟɬɨ ɫɭ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɚ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ 3RXORV'DYLV ɢ 5DQGROSK
Wroth(1978ɭɮɨɪɦɢ ɢ(4-6) ɱɢʁɢɦɫɟɭɜɨɻɟʃɟɦɬɚɛɟɥɚɪɧɟɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɟɞɨɛɢʁɚʁɭɢ
ɩɪɢɤDɡɭMɭ GeoData2 ɞɢMDɝɪDɦɢ ɩɪHɦD Rɜɢɦ ɪHɲHʃɢɦD ɡD ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɨ ɞɢɦHɧɡɢRɧɢɫDʃH
ɲɢɩRɜDɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɠHʂHɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɭɫɥRMHɜɢɬRʁɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ.
Ʉȴɍɑɇȿ Ɋȿɑɂ: ɋPT, ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɢ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢ ɦɟɞɢʁɭɦ.
DISPLACEMENT OF AXIAL COMPRESSED

PILES IN LAYERED ELASTIC MEDIUM
ABSTRACT
For practical application, solutions of Poulos,Davis(1980) and Randolph,Wroth(1978) are
summarized, in the form (1) and (4-6), whose introduction in tabular calculations provides
and displays GeoData2 diagrams according to these solutions for direct pile dimensioning in
terms of desired load and settlement in a layered elastic medium.
KEYWORDS: CPT, pile settlement, layered elastic medium.
ɍȼɈȾ
Ɂɛɨɝɱɢʃɟɧɢɰɟɞɚɫɟɬɥɨɭɡɲɢɩɭɬɨɤɭʃɟɝɨɜɨɝɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚɩɨɪɟɦɟʄɭʁɟɢɞɚɬɚɤɜɨɫɚ
ɫɜɨʁɫɬɜɢɦɚ ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦ ɨɞ ɨɧɢɯ ɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɢɯ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɦ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɢɦɚ ɭɬɢɱɟ ɧɚ
ɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɨʁ ɪɟɝɭɥɚɬɢɜɢ (EC7 – EN 1997-1:2004) ɝɨɬɨɜɨ ɫɜɢ
ɩɪɢɯɜɚɬʂɢɜɢɩɨɫɬɭɩɰɢɡɚɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚʃɟɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɦɨɪɚʁɭɧɟɩɨɫɪɟɞɧɨɢɥɢɩɨɫɪɟɞɧɨɛɢɬɢ
ɡɚɫɧɨɜɚɧɢ ɧɚ ɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɢɦ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɯ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɯ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ Ɍɢ
ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɢɩɨɫɬɭɩɰɢɫɭ: ɚɧɟɩɨɫɪɟɞɧɨɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɩɪɨɛɧɢɯɲɢɩɨɜɚɛɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɟ
ɢɥɢɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɟɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɟɦɟɬɨɞɟɱɢʁɚʁɟɜɚʂɚɧɨɫɬɩɨɬɜɪɻɟɧɚɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɦɩɪɨɛɧɢɦ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɢɦɚɭɭɩɨɪɟɞɢɜɢɦɫɢɬɭɚɰɢʁɚɦɚɢɜɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɢɯɭɞɚɪɧɢɯɨɩɢɬɚ
ɱɢʁɚ ʁɟ ɜɚʂɚɧɨɫɬ ɩɨɬɜɪɻɟɧɚ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɦ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɦ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɢɦɚ ɭ ɭɩɨɪɟɞɢɜɢɦ
ɫɢɬɭɚɰɢʁɚɦɚ(IvãLüɌi dr.,2006) – ɲɬɨɞɨɦɚʄɟɢɡɜɨɻɚɱɟɢɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɚɧɬɟɭɩɭʄɭʁɟɧɚɜɟʄɢ
ɨɛɢɦ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɯ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɢ ɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɬɢɡɚɰɢʁɭ ɪɚɫɩɨɥɨɠɢɜɢɯ ɩɨɞɚɬɚɤɚ ɤɚɤɨ ɛɢ ɫɟ
ɫɬɜɨɪɢɥɢ ɭɫɥɨɜɢ ɡɚ ɩɪɟɩɨɡɧɚɜɚʃɟ ɭɩɨɪɟɞɢɜɢɯ ɫɢɬɭɚɰɢʁɚ ɡɚ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚʃɟ ɢɥɢ
376
ɤɚɥɢɛɪɢɫɚʃɟɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɢɯɦɟɬɨɞɚɢɩɨɫɬɢɝɥɚɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɚɜɟɪɢɮɢɤɚɰɢʁɚɩɨɫɬɭɩɚɤɚ
ɤɚɨɭɛɨɝɚɬɢʁɢɦɫɪɟɞɢɧɚɦɚ ɭɫɤɥɚɞɭɫɚɟɜɪɨɩɫɤɢɦEC7.
Ɍɚɤɨ ɧɩɪ ɢ DIN 1054(2005) ɧɚɥɚɠɟ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɛɭɲɟɧɢɯ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɧɚ
ɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɢɦ ɜɟɡɚɦɚ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɢ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɜɪɯɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɱɟɦɭ ɫɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ ɬɥɚ
ɩɨɪɟɞ) ɨɦɨɬɚɱɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚD ɡɚɞɚʁɟɡɚɫɥɟɝɚʃɟs/D < 0,02 ɧɚʁɜɢɲɟ 3 cm) ɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ
ɬɥɚɢɫɩɨɞ) ɛɚɡɟ ɲɢɩɚɢɭɤɭɩɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɚ ɤɚɨɡɛɢɪɞɜɟɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ) ɡɚɞɚʁɟɫɟ ɡɚ
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɭɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɩɪɢɫɥɨɦɭɬɥɚ, ɤɨʁɚɭɫɤɥɚɞɭɫɚEC7 ɢɡɧɨɫɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ
ɲɢɩɚ ɬʁ ɛɚɡɟ ɲɢɩɚ, ɭɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɩɪɟ ɬɨɝɚ ɫɥɨɦ ɧɢʁɟ ʁɚɫɧɨ ɜɢɞʂɢɜ ɫɚ ɤɪɢɜɟ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ Ɍɚɤɜɚ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ ɛɭɲɟɧɢɯ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɫɟ ɧɚ ɨɫɧɨɜɭ ɡɚɞɚɬɢɯ
ɫɩɟɰɢɮɢɱɧɢɯɨɬɩɨɪɚɢɫɩɨɞɛɚɡɟ ɩɪɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɢɦɚs/D ɢɢɨɤɨɲɢɩɚɭ
ɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬɢ ɨɞ CPT ɨɬɩɨɪɚ q c ɡɚ
ɧɟɤɨɯɟɪɟɧɬɧɚ
ɬɥɚ ɢ ɧɟɞɪɟɧɢɪɚɧɟ ɱɜɪɫɬɨʄɟ c u ) ɡɚ
ɤɨɯɟɪɟɧɬɧɚ
ɬɥɚ
ɍ ɩɨɞɪɭɱʁɢɦɚ ɫɚ ɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɧɨ ɛɪɨʁɧɢɦ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɯ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɢɢɥɢ
ɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɧɨɭɩɨɪɟɞɢɜɢɦɫɢɬɭɚɰɢʁɚɦɚɤɚɨɧɚɩɪɟɞ), ɡɚ ɩɪɚɤɫɭ ɢɞɚʂɟɨɫɬɚʁɟ ɦɧɨɲɬɜɨ
ɬɟɨɪɢʁɫɤɨ-ɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɢɯ ɢɥɢ ɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɢɯ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ɢɡ ɨɛɢɦɧɟ ɫɜɟɬɫɤɟ ɥɢɬɟɪɚɬɭɪɟ
ɭɤʂɭɱɭʁɭʄɢ ɢ ɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɟ ɫɨɮɬɜɟɪɟ ɫɚ ɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɢɦ ɪɟɲɟʃɢɦɚ – ɤɨʁɢɦɚ ɫɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɢ
ɤɨɧɜɟɧɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɨ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɲɭ ɭ ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɬɥɚ ɢɢɥɢ ɨɱɟɤɢɜɚɧɨɝ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ
ɲɢɩɚ ɭ ɞɨɦɚʄɨʁ ɩɪɚɤɫɢ ɩɪɟɱɟɫɬɨ ɛɟɡ ɧɭɠɧɟ ɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɟ ɢɧɬɟɪɩɪɟɬɚɰɢʁɟ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ
ɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɢɯɢɥɚɛɨɪɚɬɨɪɢʁɫɤɢɯɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɢɞɨɜɨʂɧɢɯ ɭɜɢɞɚɭ ɭɫɥɨɜɟɡɚɤɨʁɟɪɟɲɟʃɚ
ɦɨɝɭɞɚɜɚɠɟ
Ɂɚ ɩɨɜɟɡɢɜɚʃɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɢ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɧɚʁɝɪɭɛʂɚ ɩɪɟɬɩɨɫɬɚɜɤɚ ɡɚ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ
ɲɢɩɚ ʁɟ ɞɚ ʁɟ ɨɧɨ ʁɟɞɧɚɤɨ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɭ ɟɤɜɢɜɚɥɟɧɬɧɟ ɤɜɚɞɪɚɬɧɟ
ɫɬɨɩɟ
ɧɚ ɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱɟɧɨʁ
ɞɭɛɢɧɢɤɨʁɚɡɚɜɢɫɢɨɞɝɪɚɻɟɬɟɪɟɧɚɩɨɞɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦʁɟɞɧɚɤɨɦ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭɲɢɩɚ Ɉɧɚ
ʁɟɭɩɪɚɤɫɢ ɩɪɟɜɚɡɢɻɟɧɚ ɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɢɦɚɧɚɥɢɡɚɦɚɩɪɟɧɨɫɚɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɫɚɲɢɩɚɧɚɬɥɨɭɡ
ɨɦɨɬɚɱɢɛɚɡɭɲɢɩɚɢɡɱɟɝɚ ɫɭɩɪɨɢɡɚɲɥɚɚɤɬɭɟɥɧɚ ɚɪɟɲɟʃɚɫɚ ɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɬɢɡɨɜɚɧɢɦ
ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɦɚ ɩɪɟɧɨɫɚ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɤɪɨɡ ɨɫɧɨɜɧɟ ɬɢɩɨɜɟ ɬɥɚ ɢ ɛ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ɡɚ ɬɥɨ ɤɚɨ
ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢ ɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɭɦɫɚɩɪɢɦɟɧɨɦFEM ɢɥɢBEM ɢɥɢ, ɤɚɨ ɞɨɜɨʂɧɨɩɨɭɡɞɚɧɚ ɢ ɞɚɧɚɫ
ɭɩɪɚɤɫɢɚɤɬɭɟɥɧɚ, ɩɨʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɚɬɟɨɪɢʁɫɤɚɪɟɲɟʃɚ ɡɚɯɨɦɨɝɟɧɭɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɭɫɪɟɞɢɧɭ
– ɩɪɢɦɟɧɨɦ ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɚ Poulos,Davis(1980) ɢ ɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɨɝ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ Randolph,Wroth
(1978) ɭ ɨɫɜɟɠɟɧɢɦ ɜɚɪɢʁɚɧɬɚɦɚ Mayne,Niazi,2009; Viggiani et al.,2012). Ɍɚ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ
ɬɟɨɪɢʁɟɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢɨɜɞɟ ɫɟɩɪɢɤɚɡɭʁɭ ɫɚɠɟɬɨ, ɡɚɩɪɚɤɫɭ, ɫɚɩɪɢɦɟɪɢɦɚ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɟ ɡɚ
ɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɭɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɭɫɪɟɞɢɧɭɭɨɤɜɢɪɭɩɚɤɟɬɚGeoData2 ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄɢɞɪ) –
ɞɨɤɫɟɢɡɚɞɨɦɚʄɟɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɟɭɫɥɨɜɟɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɢɬɭɢɲɭɞɨɜɨʂɧɨɩɨɭɡɞɚɧɚɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɚ
ɪɟɲɟʃɚɩɪɟɦɚEC7.
Ɋ(ɒ(ȵE POULOS,DAVIS(1980)
ɉɪɟɦɚɢɫɚɞɚɚɤɬɭɟɥɧɨɦɪɟɲɟʃɭ ɛɪɨʁɧɨɰɢɬɢɪɚɧɢɯɚɭɬɨɪɚ (Poulos,Davis,1980), ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ

(s) ɜɪɯɚɥɟɛɞɟʄɟɝ ɲɢɩɚɩɨɡɧɚɬɟɞɭɠɢɧɟL) ɭɬɥɭ, ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɜɪɚɬɚ(d) ɢɛɚɡɟd b ) ɢɦɨɞɭɥɚ
ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ E p ) ɨɫɧɨ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɨɝ ɤɨɦɩɪɟɫɢɨɧɨɦ ɫɢɥɨɦ V), ɭ ɬɥɭ ɤɚɨ ɯɨɦɨɝɟɧɨʁ
ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨʁ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ ɫɚ ɉɨɚɫɨɧɨɜɢɦ ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɨɦ Ȟ s ɢ ɦɨɞɭɥɨɦ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ (E s ),
ɦɨɠɟɫɟɫɚɞɨɜɨʂɧɨɬɚɱɧɨɫɬɢɫɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɢɤɚɨ
‫ ܸ[ = ݏ‬Τ(‫ܧ‬௦ ݀)]‫ܫ‬ ‫ܫ = ܫ‬௢ ܴ௄ ܴ௛ ܴఔ (1)

377
ɝɞɟɫɭ I o ɤɨɟɮ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɤɪɭɬɨɝɲɢɩɚɭɬɥɭɤɚɨɩɨɥɭɩɪɨɫɬɨɪɭɫɚȞ s =0,5 (ɋɥɢɤɚ

R K ɤɨɟɮ ɤɨɪɟɤɰɢʁɟɡɛɨɝɪɟɚɥɧɟɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɚ K = E p /E s ɋɥɢɤɚɚ
R h ɤɨɟɮ ɪɟɞɭɤɰɢʁɟɡɛɨɝɱɜɪɲʄɟɩɨɞɢɧɟɫɚ E b ɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɢh > L ɋɥɢɤɚb)
R Ȟ ɤɨɟɮ ɪɟɞɭɤɰɢʁɟɡɛɨɝɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɛɢɥɧɨɫɬɢ ɬɥɚɫɚȞ s <0,5 ɋɥɢɤɚc)
ɋɥɢɤɚɄɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ, Iɨ (Poulos,Davis,1980)
Figure 1. Settlement-influence factor, Iɨ (Poulos,Davis,1980)
Ɂɚɫɬɨʁɟʄɢ ɲɢɩɧɚɱɜɪɲʄɨʁɩɨɞɢɧɢɫɚɦɨɞɭɥɨɦɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢE b ɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɢh = L, ɭɦɟɫɬɨ

R h ɭɫɟɭɧɨɫɢ R b – ɤɨɟɮɪɟɞɭɤɰɢʁɟɡɛɨɝɱɜɪɲʄɟɩɨɞɢɧɟɋɥɢɤɚ
378
(a
(b
10
(c
ɋɥɢɤɚ2ɄɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɢɚRK ɡɛɨɝK ɲɢɩɚ, (b) Rh ɡɛɨɝh, (c) RȞ ɡɛɨɝȞ (Poulos,Davis,1980)

Figure 2. Correction factors ɚRK due to K, (b) Rh due to h, (c) RȞ due to Ȟ
379
ɋɥɢɤɚ3Ʉɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬ ɪɟɞɭɤɰɢʁɟRb ɡɛɨɝɩɨɞɢɧɟɫɬɨʁɟʄɟɝɲɢɩɚ (Poulos,Davis,1980)

Figure 3. Base modulus correction factor Rb for end-bearing pile (Poulos,Davis,1980)
380
Ɋ(ɒ(ȵE RANDOLPH,WROTH(1978)
Randolph and Wroth (1978) ɚɧɚɥɢɡɢɪɚɥɢ ɫɭ ɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɭ ɛɚɡɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɢ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɝ

ɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɭɦɚɢɨɞɜɨʁɟɧɨɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɭɨɦɨɬɚɱɚɢɞɜɚɪɟɲɟʃɚɫʁɟɞɢɧɢɥɢɭ ɩɨʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜ-
ʂɟɧɨ ɬɟɨɪɢʁɫɤɨ ɨɩɲɬɟ ɪɟɲɟʃɟ ɡɚ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ.ɪɟɥɚɬɢɜɧɨ ɤɪɭɬɨɝ ɲɢɩɚ ɭ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɦ
ɩɨɥɭɩɪɨɫɬɨɪɭ, ɫɚɚɤɬɭɟɥɧɢɦɜɟɪɡɢʁɚɦɚ ɭɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɨʁɥɢɬɟɪɚɬɭɪɢɢɩɪɚɤɫɢ.
ɉɪɟɦɚ ɜɟɪɡɢʁɢ Viggiani et al.(2012), ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ s) ɜɪɯɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɨɡɧɚɬɟ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ L),
ɩɨɥɭɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ ɜɪɚɬɚ r = d/2 ɢ ɛɚɡɟ r b = d b /2 ɢ ɦɨɞɭɥɚ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ E p ɨɫɧɨ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɨɝ ɤɨɦɩɪɟɫɢɨɧɨɦ ɫɢɥɨɦ V), ɭ ɬɥɭ ɤɚɨ ɯɨɦɨɝɟɧɨʁ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨʁ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ ɫɚ
ɉɨɚɫɨɧɨɜɢɦɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɨɦȞɢɦɨɞɭɥɨɦɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ(E s ), ɦɨɠɟɫɟ ɫɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɢɤɚɨ
‫ ܸ[ = ݏ‬Τ(‫ܧ‬௦ ‫ܫ])ܮ‬௦ (2)

2‫(ܮ‬1 + ߥ) 4 ߟ ‫ܮ )ܮߤ(݄݃ݐ‬ 4 ߟ 2ߨߩ ‫ܮ )ܮߤ(݄݃ݐ‬
‫ܫ‬௦ = ቈ1 + ቉൘ ቈ + ቉ (3)
‫ݎ‬ 1 െ ߥ ߦ ߤ‫ݎ ܮ‬ 1െߥߦ ߞ ߤ‫ݎ ܮ‬
ɝɞɟɫɭ Ș = r b /r Ș =1 ɡɚɰɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɢɲɢɩȘ!ɡɚɲɢɩɫɚɩɪɨɲɢɪɟɧɨɦɛɚɡɨɦ
ȟ = G s /G b G = E/[2(1+Ȟ)] ɡɚ ɬɥɨɫɚG s ɨɤɨɲɢɩɚɢG b ɢɫɩɨɞɛɚɡɟ
ȡ = ‫ۅ‬/G s ɡɚɲɢɩɨɜɟɤɪɨɡɬɥɨɫɚɩɪɨɦɟɧʂɢɜɨɦɤɪɭɬɨɲʄɭ
ߞ = ݈݊‫{ۃ‬0,25 + [2,5ߩ(1 െ ߥ) െ 0,25]ߦ} ‫ܮ‬Τ‫ۄݎ‬
Ȝ = ȿ p /E s ɪɟɥɚɬɢɜɧɚɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɲɢɩɚ
ߤ‫ = ܮ‬ඥ2Τ(ߞߣ) ‫ܮ‬Τ‫ݎ‬
Ʉɚɤɨɫɟɜɢɞɢɪɟɲɟʃɟʁɟɩɪɢɦɟʃɢɜɨɢɡɚɞɜɨɫɥɨʁɧɭɫɪɟɞɢɧɭɫɚɱɜɪɲʄɢɦɬɥɨɦɛɚɡɟ
ɉɪɟɦɚ ɜɟɪɡɢʁɢ Mayne,Niazi(2009), ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨʁ ɢɡ ɨɩɲɬɟɝ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ɩɨɫɥɟ ɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɢɯ
ɟɤɫɩɟɪɢɦɟɧɬɚɥɧɢɯɩɪɨɜɟɪɚɧɟɲɬɨɩɨɝɨɞɧɢʁɨʁ ɡɚɩɪɢɦɟɧɭɭɩɪɚɤɫɢɦɨɠɟɫɟɨɞɪɟɞɢɬɢ
ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɤɪɭɬɨɝɥɟɛɞɟʄɟɝ(floating) ɢɥɢɫɬɨʁɟʄɟɝend-bearing) ɲɢɩɚɞɚɬɟɞɭɠɢɧɟLɢ
ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚdɭɞɜɨɫɥɨʁɧɨʁɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢɭɤɨʁɨʁʁɟɨɤɨɲɢɩɚɬɥɨɫɚɉɨɚɫɨɧɨɜɢɦ
ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɨɦ Ȟ ɢ ɟɤɜɢɜɚɥɟɧɬɧɢɦ ɦɨɞɭɥɨɦ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ (E s ) – ɤɨʁɢ ɦɨɠɟ ɛɢɬɢ
ɤɨɧɫɬɚɧɬɚ ɢɥɢ ɦɨɠɟ ɞɚ ɪɚɫɬɟ ɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɨ ɫɚ ɞɭɛɢɧɨɦ ɡɚ ɨɞɚɛɪɚɧɨ k E ǻEǻz ɤɚɨ ɭ
ɝɟɧɟɪɚɥɢɡɨɜɚɧɨɦ Gibson-ɬɥɭ, ɨɞ E sɨ ɨɤɨ ɜɪɯɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɢ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɞɨ E sM =
E sɨ +k E (L/2) ɨɤɨɫɪɟɞɢɧɟɲɢɩɚɢɞɨE sL = E sɨ +k E L ɩɨɪɟɞɛɚɡɟɲɢɩɚ – ɚɢɫɩɨɞɲɢɩɚje ɬɥɨ
ɛɚɡɟɫɚɦɨɞɭɥɨɦɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢE b ). Ɂɚɬɚɤɜɟɭɫɥɨɜɟɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɫɟɦɨɠɟɫɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɢɤɚɨ
‫ ܸ[ = ݏ‬Τ(‫ܧ‬௦௅ ݀)]‫ܫ‬௦ (4)

1
‫ܫ‬௦ = (5)
‫ܧ‬௕ 1 ߨ ‫ ܮ‬Τ݀
+
‫ܧ‬௦௅ 1 െ ߥ ଶ 1 + ߥ ߞ௣
௅ ாೞಽ
ߞ௣ = ݈݊ ‫ۃ‬5 ቄ [ߩா (1 െ ߥ) െ 0,1] + 0,1ቅ‫ۄ‬ (6)
ௗ ா್
ாೞಾ ଵ
ɝɞɟʁɟ ߩா = =1െ
ாೞಽ ଶாೞ೚Τ(௞ಶ ௅)ାଶ
381
ɍɨɤɜɢɪɭɨɜɟɜɟɪɡɢʁɟɡɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɢɧɚʁɫɥɨɠɟɧɢʁɢɫɥɭɱɚʁɞɚʁɟɫɟɢɩɪɨɩɨɪɰɢʁɚɨɬɩɨɪɚɛɚɡɟ
(V b ɩɪɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɭɢɭɤɭɩɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɲɢɩɚ (V):
ܸ௕ 1
= (7)
ܸ ߨ ‫ܧ‬௦௅ ‫ܮ‬
1+ (1 െ ߥ)
ߞ௣ ‫ܧ‬௕ ݀
Ɂɚ ɧɚʁʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜɧɢʁɢ ɫɥɭɱɚʁ ɫɚ ɯɨɦɨɝɟɧɢɦ ɬɥɨɦ Ȟ,E s = const.) ɨɤɨ ɢ ɢɫɩɨɞ ɲɢɩɚ ɢ
ɪɟɲɟʃɟ-ɡɚɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɩɨɫɬɚʁɟʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜɧɨ:
1
‫ ܸ[ = ݏ‬Τ(‫ܧ‬௦ ݀)]‫ܫ‬௦ ‫ܫ‬௦ = (4ᇱ , ͷԢ)
1 ߨ ‫ ܮ‬Τ݀
+
1 െ ߥ ଶ 1 + ߥ ݈݊[5(‫ܮ‬Τ݀ )(1 െ ߥ)]
ɉɊɂɆȿɇȺɊȿɒȿȵȺɍɋɅɈȳȿȼɂɌɈȳȿɅȺɋɌɂɑɇɈȳɋɊȿȾɂɇɂ

ɫɬɚɦɛɟɧɟ ɤɭɥɟ ɜɢɫɢɧe 92 m ɭ ɇɢɲɭ (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ ɢ ɞɪ aɭɬoɪɢ oɜoɝa ɪaɞa
ɩɪɨɲɢɪɢɥɢ ɫɭ ɫoɮɬɜeɪɫɤɢ ɩɚɤɟɬ GeoData2 (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦ
ɞɢjaɝɪaɦa ɡa ɞɢɪɟɤɬɚɧɢɡɛɨɪɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɢɞɭɛɢɧɚ ɛɭɲeɧɢɯɲɢɩoɜa ɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɭ ɧoɫɢɜoɫɬ
ɩɪeɦa jɭɝoɫɥoɜeɧɫɤoɦ ɉɪaɜɢɥɧɢɤɭ ɢ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɢɦ CPT-ɪeɲeʃɢɦa LCPC (1982),
MɢɥoɜɢʄɢLPC(2012), ɤDRɢɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɨɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɲɢɩRɜDɭɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨʁɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ
ɩɪHɦD ɪHɲHʃɢɦD 3RXORV'DYLV ɢ 5DQGROSK:URWK – ɫɚ ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɦɚ
ɦɟɻɭɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬɢɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɢɞɭɛɢɧɟɲɢɩɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦɬɥɭɤɚɨ
ɢɦɟɻɭɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬɢ ɨɜɢɯɭɬɢɰɚʁɚɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɲɢɩɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦɬɥɭ.
Ʉɚɨ ɢ ɡɚ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧe ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɚ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɭ ɞɪɭɝɨɦ ɪɚɞɭ ɚɭɬɨɪɚ ɭ ɨɜɨɦ Ɂɛɨɪɧɢɤɭ,
ɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɢɯɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɞɨɢɫɬɪɚɠɟɧɟɞɭɛɢɧɟm Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ ɢɡɞɟʂɟɧɨʁɟɭɭɤɭɩɧɨ
ɥɚɦɟɥɚ ɜɢɫɢɧɚ h i ɫɜɚɤɚ ɫɚ ɫɜɨʁɢɦ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢɦ ɤɨɧɫɬɚɧɬɚɦɚ Ȟ i ,E i ).
Ⱥɭɬɨɦɚɬɢɡɨɜɚɧɢɦ ɬɚɛɟɥɚɪɧɢɦ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɢɦɚ ɡɚ ɞɭɛɢɧɟ z = L ɞɨ ɞɧɚ ɫɜɚɤe ɥɚɦɟɥɟ
ɨɞɪɟɻɭʁɭɫɟɟɤɜɢɜɚɥɟɧɬɧɟɟɥɚɫɬɢɱ-ɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɚɧɬɟ ɝɪɭɩɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɩɨɪɟɞɲɢɩɚ
ߥ௦ = (1Τ‫ )ݖ‬σ௭଴ ݄௜ ߥ௜ ‫ܧ‬௦ = (1Τ‫ )ݖ‬σ௭଴ ݄௜ ‫ܧ‬௜
ɢɡɚɫɜɚɤɢɨɞɚɛɪɚɧɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɲɢɩɚ (d) ɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɟɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɚɬɚɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ

I dz = I s /(E s d) a ɡɚɬɢɦɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɚs=VI dz ɡɚɨɱɟɤɢɜɚɧɚɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚV) – ɩɪɟɦɚɨɩɢɫɚɧɨɦ
ɪɟɲɟʃɭ Poulos,Davis(1980) ɢ Mayne,Niazi(2009) ɜɟɪɡɢʁɢ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ Randolph,Wroth
(1978)ɫɚɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚɝɪɚɮɢɱɤɢɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢɦɭɜɢɞɭɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɚɋɥɢɤɟ4 ɢ5) ɡɚɝɪɚɻɭɢ
ɫɜɨʁɫɬɜɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɨɝɜɢɫɨɤɨɝɨɛʁɟɤɬɚɌɚɛɟɥɚɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɚCPT ɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢʁɚɦɚ ɞɨ
ɞɭɛɢɧɟɞɨɤɨʁɟɫɟɞɨɩɪɥɨɩɨɞɞɟʁɫɬɜɨɦkN ɚɧɚɧɢɠɟɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɢɯɤɨɪɟɥɚɰɢʁɚ
ɫɚɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚSPT ɢɥɚɛɨɪɚɬɨɪɢʁɫɤɢɯɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ
Ʉɚɤɨ ɫɟ ɦɨɠɟ ɜɢɞɟɬɢ ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢ ɨɦɨɝɭʄɚɜɚʁɭ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɨ ɢɥɢ ɧɟɩɨɫɪɟɞɧɨɦ
ɢɧɬɟɪɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɨɦ ɩɪɨɰɟɧɭ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɨɢɡɜɨʂɧɢɯ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚ ɩɨɞ ɩɪɨɢɡɜɨʂɧɢɦ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦ ɢɥɢɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟɲɢɩɚɡɚɠɟʂɟɧɨɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɲɬɨɭɨɤɜɢɪɭɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɟ
ɩɨɞɥɨɝɟ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɚ ɤoɧɫɬɪɭɤɬeɪɭ ɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ ɨɥɚɤɲɚɜɚ ɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɟ ɢɡɛɨɪ ɢ ɪɚɡɪɚɞɭ
ɪɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɟɜaɪɢjaɧɬɟɪeɲeʃa ɡa ɞɭɛoɤo ɬeɦeʂeʃe.
382
ɋɥɢɤɚ4. Ⱦɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɡɚɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟ
ɲɢɩɨɜɚɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦ
ɬɥɭɌɚɛɟɥɚɩɪɢɦɟɧɨɦ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ
Poulos&Davis(1980)
Figure 4. Diagrams for dimensioning piles
in terms of settling in layered soil (Table 1)
applying the solution Poulos&Davis (1980)
383
ɋɥɢɤɚ5. Ⱦɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɢɡɚ
ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟɲɢɩɨɜɚɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ
ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦɬɥɭɌɚɛɟɥɚ
ɩɪɢɦɟɧɨɦɜɟɪɡɢʁɟ
Mayne&Niazi(2009) ɪɟɲɟʃɚ
Randolph&Wroth(1978)
Figure 5. Diagrams for dimensioning
piles in terms of settling in layered soil
(Table 1) applying
Mayne&Niazi(2009) version of the
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ1. Ƚɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɚɫɥɨʁɟɜɚɬɟɪɟɧɚɢɫɜɨʁɫɬɜɚɬɥɚɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɦɚ (ɋɚɦɚɪɞɚɤɨɜɢʄɢɞɪ)

Table 1. The geometry of the layers of terrain and soil properties in layers
ɋɥɨʁ z [m] h [m] J ef [kN/m3 ] c' [kPa] M ' [°] q c [MPa] M v [MPa] ʆ E [MPa]
1 ɒʂɭɧɱɚɧɢʁɚɫɬɭɤ 1,00 1,00 11,0 0 35 20 40 0,25 33
2 ɒʃɭɧɚɤɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬ 5,80 4,80 11,0 0 33 20 25 0,25 21
3 Ƚɥɢɧɚɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɚ 10,80 5,00 10,0 25 20 3 6 0,3 5
4 ɉɟɫɚɤɥɚɩɨɪɨɜɢɬ 16,80 6,00 10,5 10 31 10 13 0,25 11
5 Ƚɥɢɧɚɥɚɩɨɪɨɜɢɬɚ 28,00 11,20 10,5 20 28 12 15 0,3 11
384
ɁȺɄȴɍɑɇȿɇȺɉɈɆȿɇȿ
Ʉɚɤɨʁɟɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɨɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɚɫɚɡɧɚʃɚɭɩɭʄɭʁɭɧɚɪɟɲɟʃɚɡɚɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟɲɢɩɨɜɚɤɨʁɚ
ɛɢ ɬɪɟɛɚɥɨ ɡɚɫɧɢɜɚɬɢ ɭ ɫɤɥɚɞɭ ɫɚ EC7 ɩɪɟ ɫɜɟɝɚ ɧɚ ɫɢɫɬɟɦɚɬɢɡɨɜɚɧɢɦ ɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɢɦ
ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɦɚ ɡɚ ɩɪɟɩɨɡɧɚɬʂɢɜɟ ɪɟɝɢɨɧɚɥɧɟ ɫɢɬɭɚɰɢʁɟ ɧɚʁɜɢɲɟ ɧɚ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚ-ɬɢɦɚ
ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɯ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɯ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ. Ⱦɨɤ ɬɚɤɜɚ ɧɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɚ ɪɟɝɭɥɚɬɢɜɚ ɧɟ ɛɭɞɟ
ɤɨɧɫɬɢɬɭɢɫɚɧɚɢɡɚɞɨɦɚʄɟɭɫɥɨɜɟɤɚɨɡɚɛɨɝɚɬɢʁɟɪɟɝɢɨɧɟɧɩɪAFNOR,2012 ɢɥɢDIN
1054,2005ɡɚɚɧɚɥɢɡɟ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɲɢɩɨɜɚɩɪɟɨɫɬɚʁɭɩɨɡɧɚɬɚɚɮɢɪɦɢɫɚɧɚɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɚɪɟɲɟʃɚ
3RXORV'DYLV ɢ Randolph,Wroth(1978) ɭ ɪɚɞɭ ɫɚɠɟɬɨ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɚ ɡɚ ɩɨɠɟʂɧɭ
ɨɛɢɥɧɢʁɭ ɩɪɚɤɫɭ. ɍɜɨɻɟʃɟɦ ɟɤɜɢɜɚɥɟɧɬɧɢɯ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢɯ ɤɨɧɫɬɚɧɬɢ ɡɚ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɟ ɬɥɚ ɨɤɨ
ɲɢɩɚɨɛɚɪɟɲɟʃɚɡɚɯɨɦɨɝɟɧɢɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɭɦɩɪɢɦɟʃɟɧɚɫɭ ɡɚɲɢɩɨɜɟɭɫɥɨʁɟɜɢɬɨɦɬɥɭɫɚ
ɞɨɛɢʁɚʃɟɦGeoData2 ɞɢjaɝɪaɦɚ ɋɥɢɤɟɢ) ɡɚ ɞɢɪɟɤɬɧɨɞɢɦeɧɡɢoɧɢɫaʃe ɲɢɩoɜa ɭ
ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɠeʂeɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɢ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɭ ɫɥojeɜɢɬoɦ ɬɥɭ ɲɬɨ ɤoɧɫɬɪɭɤɬeɪɭ ɛɢɬɧɨ
ɨɥɚɤɲɚɜɚɢɡɛɨɪɢɪɚɡɪɚɞɭ ɪɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɟɜaɪɢjaɧɬɟɪeɲeʃa ɞɭɛoɤoɝ ɬeɦeʂeʃɚ. ɉɪɢɦɟɧɚ
ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢɯ ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ʁɟ ɛɪɠɚ ɢ ɟɤɨɧɨɦɢɱɧɢʁɚ ɨɞ ɫɤɭɩʂɢɯ ɫɚɜɪɟɦɟɧɢɯ ɫɨɮɬɜɟɪɫɤɢɯ
ɩɚɤɟɬɚ ɚɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɟɋɥɢɤɚɢɩɨɤɚɡɭʁɟɞɚɫɟɦɟɻɭɫɨɛɧɨɛɢɬɧɨɧɟɪɚɡɥɢɤɭʁɭɩɪɢ ɱɟɦɭ
ʁɟɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɨɪɟɲɟʃɟRandolph ʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜɧɢʁɟɛɟɡɨɱɢɬɚɜɚʃɚɫɚɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɚ
ɅɂɌȿɊȺɌɍɊȺɂɊȿɎȿɊȿɇɐȿ
AFNOR NF P94-262 (2012): Justification des ouvrages géotechniques, Normes d’application

nationale de l’Eurocode 7, Fondations profondes, Paris.
DIN 1054(2005): Ground – Verification of the safety of earthworks and foundations, Annex B:
Design of axially loaded bored piles based on empirical values, pp.99-103.
EN 1997-1:2004 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 1: General rules, pp.70-88.
IvãLüɌi dr.,(2006): 6XYUHPHQLSUDNWLþQLSRVWXSFLSURUDþXQDSLORWD3ULRSüHQMDVDYMHWRYDQMD+*'
Opatija, str.381-390.
Mayne,P.W.,Niazi,F.S.(2009): Evaluating axial elastic pile response from Cone Penetracion Test,
Proceedings,CIGMAT, University of Houston, pp.1-3.
Poulos,H.G.,Davis,E.H.(1980): Pile Foundation Analysis and Design, John Wiley&Sons, New York,
pp.86-90.
Randolph,M.F.,Wroth,C.P.(1978): Analysis of deformation of vertically loaded piles, Journal
Geot.Eng. Division, ASCE, Vol.104, GT12, pp.1465-1488.
6DPDUGDNRYLü0*HRPHKDQLþNLSURJUDPVNLVLVWHPLGeoData1 i GeoData2, Zbornik radova
0HÿXQDURGQRJQDXþQRJVNXSD3UDYFLUD]YRMDJHRWHKQLNH, RGF, Beograd, str.395-404.
6DPDUGDNRYLü0'LPHQ]LRQLVDQMHRVQRRSWHUHüHQRJãLSDXYLãHVORMQRPWOXZbornik radova
VDYHWRYDQMDÄ*HRWHKQLþNLDVSHNWLJUDÿHYLQDUVWYD³, SGIT SCG, Kopaonik, str.295-300.
6DPDUGDNRYLü0 ɢɞɪ(2019): *HRWHKQLþNLXVORYLL]JUDGQMHVWDPEHQLKLSRVORYQLKREMHNDWDEU-36
kompleksa "Novi Niš", GeoSol DOO, Niš, 249 strana.
Viggiani,C. et all.(2012): Piles and Pile Foundations, Spon Press, London, pp.98-100.
385
Originalni nauþni rad

UDK 624.154.04
ȺɇȺɅɂɁȺɇɈɋɂȼɈɋɌɂɒɂɉɈȼȺɇȺ
ɈɋɇɈȼɍɊȿɁɍɅɌȺɌȺȽȿɈɆȿɏȺɇɂɑɄɂɏ
ɂɋɌɊȺɀɂȼȺȵȺɂ ɊȿɁɍɅɌȺɌȺɋɌȺɌɂɑɄɈȽ
ɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȺɒɂɉɈȼȺȺɄɋɂȳȺɅɇɈɆ
ɋɂɅɈɆɉɊɂɌɂɋɄȺ
ɇɢɤɨɥɚȻɨɠɨɜɢʄɆɚɪɢʁɚɄɪɫɬɢʄ ɄɪɢɫɬɢɧɚȻɨɠɢʄ-Ɍɨɦɢʄ
nikola.bozovic@institutims.rs
ɊȿɁɂɆȿ
ɍɪɚɞɭɫɟɩɪɢɤɚɡɭʁɭ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɞɜɚɲɢɩɚɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯɞɭɠɢɧɚɭ
ɢɫɬɢɦ ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɦ ɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚ Ɋɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɤɪɚʄɟɝ ɲɢɩɚ ɛɢɥɢ ɫɭ
ɧɟɡɚɞɨɜɨʂɚɜɚʁɭʄɢ ɲɬɨ ʁɟ ɭɫɥɨɜɢɥɨ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɢ ɧɨɜɨ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨ
ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɚɤɫɢʁɚɥɧɨɦɫɢɥɨɦɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚɢɫɬɢɦɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɨɦɤɚɨɤɨɞɤɪɚʄɟɝɲɢɩɚɇɚʁɩɪɟ
ʁɟ ɢɡɜɪɲɟɧ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɢɡ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ CPT ɨɩɢɬɚ LCPC ɦɟɬɨɞɨɦ ɢ
ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɩɪɟɦɚɞɨɦɚʄɟɦɩɪɚɜɢɥɧɢɤɭɩɨBrinch-Hansen-ɭȿɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɨɦ
ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɟ ɫɭ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ
ɞɭɠɢɧɚɉɨɜɟʄɚʃɟɞɭɠɢɧɟɲɢɩɚɨɛɟɡɛɟɞɢɥɨʁɟɢɫɩɭʃɟʃɟɭɫɥɨɜɚɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɪɚɱɭɧɫɤe
ɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟɫɢɥɟɢɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚ
ɄȴɍɑɇȿɊȿɑɂɲɢɩɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟ
ANALYSIS OF PILE BEARING CAPACITY BASED

ON THE RESULTS OF GEOMECHANICAL
INVESTIGATION Ⱥ1' THE RESULTS OF STATIC
LOAD TEST WITH AXIAL PRESSURE FORCE
ABSTRACT
The paper presents the results of static load test of two piles with different lengths under the
same geological conditions. The test results of the short pile were unsatisfactory, which led
to an increase in the pile length and test was repeated using the same program as the shorter
pile. First, the capacity of the piles obtained from the CPT test using LCPC method and the
bearing capacity was calculated according to the Brinch-Hansen’s rule. Extrapolation of the
results of static pile testing determines the bearing capacity of piles of different lengths. The
results obtained by testing the longer pile indicate the positive effect of increasing the length
so that conditions of the computed force and displacement were satisfied.
KEY WORDS: pile, bearing capacity, testing

386
ɍȼɈȾ
Ɇɨɞɟɥ ɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɟ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɬɟɦɟʂɚ ɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɤɥɚɫɢɮɢɤɭʁɟ ɫɟ ɤɚɨ ɜɢɫɨɤɨ

ɧɟɨɞɪɟɻɟɧ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢ ɫɢɫɬɟɦ Ɇɨɝɭʄɧɨɫɬ ɩɪɟɰɢɡɧɟ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɟ ɬɟɦɟʂɚ ɫɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ ʁɟ
ɡɧɚɬɧɨ ɦɚʃɚ ɭ ɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɭ ɫɚ ɞɪɭɝɢɦ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɢɦɚ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ ɬɪɟɬɢɪɚʁɭ ɭ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɰɢ,
ɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚʃɭ ɋɢɫɬɟɦɚɬɢɡɨɜɚɧɚ ɟɦɩɢɪɢʁɫɤɚ ɡɧɚʃɚ ɢ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢ ɩɪɨɛɧɢɯ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɧɚ ɥɨɤɚɰɢʁɢ ɛɭɞɭʄɟɝ ɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ ɫɭ ɨɛɢɱɧɨ ɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɢ ɡɚ ɤɨɪɟɤɬɧɨ ɪɟɲɟʃɟ
ɬɟɦɟʂɟʃɚɧɚɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ
ɍɨɜɨɦɪɚɞɭɫɭɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɚɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɞɜɚɲɢɩɚɚɤɫɢʁɚɥɧɨɦɫɢɥɨɦɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ
ɭ ɢɫɬɢɦ ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɦ ɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɨɞ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɚ ɂɆɋ ɒɢɩɨɜɢ ɫɭ ɭ
ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɬɟɯɧɨɥɨɝɢʁɟ ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɛɭɲɟɧɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɢ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ ɢɡɜɨɞɟ ɫɚ ɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɚɥɧɢɦ
ɡɚɰɟɜʂɟʃɟɦɰɟɥɨɦɞɭɠɢɧɨɦɛɭɲɟʃɚɉɪɟɱɧɢɰɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚɫɭmmɞɨɤɫɭɞɭɠɢɧɟ
ɲɢɩɨɜɚ13m ɢ22mɪɟɫɩɟɤɬɢɜɧɨ.
ȽȿɈɅɈɒɄɂɍɋɅɈȼɂɍɄɈȳɂɆȺȳȿɒɂɉɎɍɇȾɂɊȺɇ
ɒɢɩɨɜɢ ɫɭ ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɧɢ ɭ ɜɢɲɟɫɥɨʁɧɨɦ ɬɥɭ Ƚɟɨɥɨɲɤɢ ɫɚɫɬɚɜ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɱɢɧɟ 0m௅3m
(h=3m௅ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɚɝɥɢɧɚ), 3m௅10m (h=7m௅ɩɟɫɚɤɢɲʂɭɧɚɤ), 10m௅15m (h=5m௅ɩɟɫɚɤɢ
15m௅30 m (h=15m – ɝɥɢɧɚ). ɇɢɜɨɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɟɜɨɞɟɧɚɥɚɡɢɫɟɧɚm ɦɟɪɟɧɨɨɞɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚ
ɇɚɋɥɢɰɢ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢɫɭɝɟɨɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɡɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɟɫɥɨʁɟɜɟɬɥɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚȽɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɩɪɨɮɢɥɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɢɝɟɨɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɢɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ ɬɥɚ

Figure 1. Geological profile of terrain and geomechanical parameters of soil layers
ɉɊɈɊȺɑɍɇɇɈɋɂȼɈɋɌɂɒɂɉɈȼȺ
ɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɩɪɟɦɚBrinch-Hansen-ɭɫɩɪɨɜɨɞɢɫɟɩɪɢɦɟɧɨɦɢɡɪɚɡɚ
387
Q f =Q b,f +Q s,f .
Ƚɪɚɧɢɱɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɛɚɡɟɲɢɩɚʁɟ
Q b,f =A b q b,f =A b k s (ȈȖ i h i )N q ,
ɝɞɟ ʁɟ A b =d2ʌ/4, d ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤ ɲɢɩɚ, k s =1-VLQ‫ ׋‬ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬ ɛɨɱɧɨɝ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ ɬɥɚ, ȈȖ i h i

ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɢ ɧɚɩɨɧ ɭ ɧɢɜɨɭ ɛɚɡɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɢ N q ɮɚɤɬɨɪ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ. Ƚɪɚɧɢɱɧɚ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ
ɨɦɨɬɚɱɚɲɢɩɚʁɟ
Q s,f =Ȉ(ǻ/)a s Ĳ s,f ,
ɝɞɟʁɟǻ/ ɞɭɠɢɧɚɲɢɩɚɭɩɨɫɦɚɬɪɚɧɨɦɫɥɨʁɭa s ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚɨɦɨɬɚɱɚɫɬɚɛɥɚɡɚm', a s =Gʌ,

Ĳ s,f ɫɦɢɱɭʄɚɱɜɪɫɬɨʄɚɬɥɚ:
௖ ୲୥థ
߬௦,௙ = + ‫(ݍ‬1 െ ‫ )߶݊݅ݏ‬,
ଶ.ହ ଵ.ହ
c ɤɨɯɟɡɢʁɚɡɚɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɢɫɥɨʁ, q ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɢɧɚɩɨɧɧɚɜɢɫɢɧɟɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɟɝɫɥɨʁɚ
ɢ ‫ ׋‬ɭɝɚɨɭɧɭɬɪɚɲʃɟɝɬɪɟʃɚ. ɍɬɚɛɟɥɢɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɟɫɭɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɨɜɚɩɪɟɦɚBrinch-
Hansen-ɭ ɇɚɫɥɢɰɢɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢ ɫɭɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɩɪɨɦɟɧɟ ɨɬɩɨɪɚɩɪɨɞɢɪɚʃɚɤɨɧɭɫɚ ɩɨ
ɞɭɛɢɧɢ. ɍɧɚɫɬɚɜɤɭɬɟɤɫɬɚɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢ ɫɭ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɢɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɢɡɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚCPT ɨɩɢɬɚ
(LCPC ɦɟɬɨɞɚɡɚɨɛɚɲɢɩɚ
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚɇɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚɩɪɟɦɚBrinch-Hansen-ɭ
Table 1. Load capacity of piles according to Brinch-Hansen
Ȼɪɨʁ ɲɢɩɚ Q b,f [kN] Q s,f [kN] Q[kN]
ɒ[L=13m] 360 630 990
ɒ[L=22m] 400 1570 1970
ɋɥɢɤɚ2. Ʉɪɢɜɚɩɪɨɦɟɧɟɨɬɩɨɪɚɩɪɨɞɢɪɚʃɚɤɨɧɭɫɚɩɨɞɭɛɢɧɢ q c ௅CPT ɨɩɢɬ

Figure 2. Curve of change of cone penetration resistance by depth qc - CPT experiment
ɒɢɩɒ௅ L=13m:
௅ɩɪɨɫɟɱɧɚɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɨɬɩɨɪɚɤɨɧɭɫɚɧɚɨɛɟɥɟɠɟɧɨʁɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢq caa =13.3MPa,
388
௅ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɩɨɛɚɡɢɢɡɧɨɫɢ:R b =(C lcpc q caa A b )/2.5=900kN,

௅ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɩɨɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ ɢɡɧɨɫɢ:R s =1300kN,
௅ ɭɤɭɩɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɚɢɡɧɨɫɢ: R d =R b +R s =2200kN.
ɒɢɩɒ௅L=22m:
௅ ɩɪɨɫɟɱɧɚɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɨɬɩɨɪɚɤɨɧɭɫɚɧɚɨɛɟɥɟɠɟɧɨʁɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɢq caa =5.4MPa,
௅ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɩɨɛɚɡɢɢɡɧɨɫɢ:R b =(C lcpc q caa A b )/2.5=600kN,
௅ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɩɨɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ ɢɡɧɨɫɢ:R s =1600kN,
௅ ɭɤɭɩɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɚɢɡɧɨɫɢ: R d =R b +R s =2200kN.
ɋɌȺɌɂɑɄɈɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȿɒɂɉɈȼȺȺɄɋɂȳȺɅɇɈɆɋɂɅɈɆ
ɉɊɂɌɂɋɄȺ
ɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɂɆɋʁɟɫɩɪɨɜɟɨ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟ, ɧɚʁɩɪɟ, ɒɢɩa ɩɚɩɨɬɨɦɢɒɢɩɚ,

ɱɢʁɟ ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɟʁɟɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚɧɟɡɚɞɨɜɨʂɚɜɚʁɭʄɢɯɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɒɢɩɚȼɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɟ
ɪɚɞɧɟɫɢɥɟɢɡɧɨɫɢkNɈɜɚɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬʁɟɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɚ ɨɞɫɬɪɚɧɟɂɧɜɟɫɬɢɬɨɪɚɍɫɜɨʁɟɧɢ
ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɡɚɭɜɟʄɚʃɟɪɚɞɧɟɫɢɥɟʁɟɬɚɤɨɞɚʁɟɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɚɫɢɥɚɭɨɩɢɬɭɢɡɧɨɫɢɥɚ
3600kNɂɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟʁɟɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɨɭɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɢɦɚɨɞɭɨɞɧɨɫɭɧɚɪɚɞɧɭɫɢɥɭ
ɍɫɥɨɜɡɚɩɪɨɦɟɧɭɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɚɛɢɨʁɟɞɚɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɛɭɞɟɦɚʃɟɨɞmm ɡɚɜɪɟɦɟɨɞ
ɫɚɬɚɍɤɭɩɧɨ ɜɪɟɦɟɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚʃɚ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɧɟɫɦɟɞɚɛɭɞɟɤɪɚʄɟɨɞɫɚɬɢɉɪɨɰɟɫ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɢɪɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɨɛɚɜʂɚɫɟɭɞɜɚɰɢɤɥɭɫɚ:
௅I ɰɢɤɥɭɫ-450-900-1350-1800-1350-900-450-0 (kN),
௅II ɰɢɤɥɭɫ-900-1350-1800-2160-2700-3150-3600-3150-2700-2160-1800-1350-900-
450-0 (kN).
ɂɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɲɢɩɨɜɚʁɟɢɡɜɪɲɟɧɨɨɩɢɬɨɦɭɤɨɦɟʁɟɤɚɨɩɨɬɢɫɧɨɫɪɟɞɫɬɜɨɭɩɨɬɪɟɛʂɟɧɚ
ʁɟɞɧɚɯɢɞɪɚɭɥɢɱɧɚɩɪɟɫɚɤɚɩɚɰɢɬɟɬɚt ɫɥɢɤɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚɊɟɚɤɬɢɜɧɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɡɚ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢ ɬɟɫɬɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɲɢɩɚɢɞɢɝɢɬɚɥɧɢɤɨɦɩɚɪɚɬɟɪ

Figure 3.Reactive system for static pile load test and digital displacement indicator
389
ɉɪɟɫɚʁɟɩɭɬɟɦɰɪɟɜɚɜɢɫɨɤɨɝɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚɩɨɜɟɡɚɧɚɫɚɯɢɞɪɚɭɥɢɱɧɨɦɩɭɦɩɨɦɉɪɟɫɚɫɟ
ɨɞɭɩɢɪɟɨɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɭɡɚɨɞɭɩɢɪɚʃɟɪɟɚɤɬɢɜɧɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧɭɨɞɞɜɟɭɧɚɤɪɫɧɨ
ɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɟɱɟɥɢɱɧɟɝɪɟɞɟɤɨʁɟɫɭɡɚɬɟɝɚɦɚɚɧɤɟɪɨɜɚɧɟɭɱɟɬɢɪɢɚɧɤɟɪɧɚɲɢɩɚɩɨɞɜɚ
ɡɚ ɫɜɚɤɭ ɱɟɥɢɱɧɭ ɝɪɟɞɭɁɚ ɡɚɬɟɝɟ ɫɭ ɤɨɪɢɲʄɟɧɟ ɰɟɜɢ ɫɚ ɧɚɜɨʁɟɦ mm ɨɞ ɱɟɥɢɤɚ
ɜɢɫɨɤɟ ɱɜɪɫɬɨʄɟ. Ɇɟɪɟʃɟ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɨɝ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɚʄɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɩɨɦɨʄɭ ɱɟɬɢɪɢ
ɞɢɝɢɬɚɥɧɚɤɨɦɩɚɪɚɬɟɪɚɤɨʁɢɫɭɛɢɥɢɩɨɜɟɡɚɧɢɡɚɪɟɮɟɪɟɧɬɧɟɝɪɟɞɟ௅ɫɢɫɬɟɦɤɨʁɢɱɢɧɟ
ɱɟɥɢɱɧɢ ɤɭɬɢʁɚɫɬɢ ɩɪɨɮɢɥɢ Ⱦɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ ɪɟɮɟɪɟɧɬɧɢɯ ɝɪɟɞɚ, ɭɫɥɟɞ ɬɟɦɩɟɪɚɬɭɪɧɢɯ
ɭɬɢɰɚʁɚ, ɨɫɦɚɬɪɚɧɚ ʁɟ ɞɢɝɢɬɚɥɧɢɦ ɧɢɜɟɥɢɪɨɦ Ɍɚɤɨɻɟ ɨɫɦɚɬɪɚɧɨ ʁɟ ɢ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ
ɩɨɦɨʄɭɧɢɜɟɥɢɪɚɬɚɤɨʁɟɜɪɲɟɧɚɤɨɧɬɪɨɥɚ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɨɱɢɬɚɜɚɧɢɯ ɧɚɤɨɦɩɚɪɚɬɟɪɢɦɚ
ɊȿɁɍɅɌȺɌɂɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȺɒɂɉȺɒ ɂɒ
ɇɚɫɥɢɰɢ ɫɭɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɟɤɪɢɜɟɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ௅ɫɢɥɚ-ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɲɢɩɚɒɢ ɒ

ɪɟɫɩɟɤɬɢɜɧɨ Ʉɨɞɲɢɩɚɒ, ɡɚɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɟɫɢɥɟɨɞ1800kN, ɪɟɚɥɢɡɨɜɚɧɨʁɟ
ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɨɞ mm ɞɨɤ ʁɟ ɤɨɞ ɲɢɩɚ ɒ ɡɚ ɢɫɬɭ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ,
ɪɟɚɥɢɡɨɜɚɧɨ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɨɞ 4.3mm. Ʉɨɞ ɲɢɩɚ ɒ ɡɚ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɨɞ
3600kN, ɪɟɚɥɢɡɨɜɚɧɨʁɟɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɨɞmmɞɨɤʁɟɤɨɞɲɢɩɚɒɡɚ ɢɫɬɭ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ
ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɟɫɢɥɟɪɟɚɥɢɡɨɜɚɧɨɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɨɞ21.6mm.
ɚ ɛ
ɋɥɢɤɚɄɪɢɜɟɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ௅ɫɢɥɚ-ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɚɲɢɩɒɛɲɢɩɒ

Figure 4. Load curves - force-settlement: a) pile ɒ1, b) pile ɒ2
ɉɊɈɊȺɑɍɇɇɈɋɂȼɈɋɌɂɒɂɉɈȼȺɇȺɈɋɇɈȼɍɊȿɁɍɅɌȺɌȺ
ɋɌȺɌɂɑɄɈȽɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȺ
Davisson-ɨɜɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦ
Ƚɪɚɧɢɱɧɚ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ ɲɢɩɚ ʁɟ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɚ ɬɚɱɤɨɦ ɭ ɤɨʁɨʁ ɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɚ ɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɚ ɫɟɱɟ
ɢɡɦɟɪɟɧɭ ɫɢɥɚ-ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟɤɪɢɜɭ Ʌɢɧɟɚɪɧɚ ɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɚ ʁɟ ɬɪɚɧɫɥɢɪɚɧɚ ɭ ɨɞɧɨɫɭ ɧɚ
ɤɨɨɪɞɢɧɚɬɧɢ ɩɨɱɟɬɚɤ ɡɚ 3.8+D ɝɞɟ ʁɟ D ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤ ɲɢɩɚ ɭ mm ɚ ʃɟɧ ɧɚɝɢɛ ɫɟ
ɢɡɪɚɱɭɧɚɜɚɤɚɨǻ=QL/AEɝɞɟʁɟQ ɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɫɢɥɟɤɨʁɨɦʁɟɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɲɢɩL ɞɭɠɢɧɚ
ɲɢɩɚȺ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝɩɪɟɫɟɤɚɲɢɩɚɢȿ ɦɨɞɭɥɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɨɞɤɨɝɚ
390
ʁɟɲɢɩɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧ. Ɇɟɬɨɞɚʁɟ ɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱʂɢɜɚ ɡɚ ɩɨɛɢʁɟɧɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɟɢ ɢɦɚɤɨɧɡɟɪɜɚɬɢɜɧɢ

ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɭɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɭɫɚɨɫɬɚɥɢɦɦɟɬɨɞɚɦɚ
Hansen-ɨɜɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦ
Ɂɚɫɧɢɜɚ ɫɟ ɧɚ ɫɬɚɜɭ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ, ɤɨʁɟ ɩɪɨɢɡɜɨɞɢ ɱɟɬɢɪɢ ɩɭɬɚ ɜɟʄɟ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ
ɨɱɢɬɚɧɨɡɚ ɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɟɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɩɪɨɝɥɚɲɚɜɚɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɢɦɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦɬɚɤɨ
ɞɚ ɫɟ ɦɨɠɟ ɨɞɪɟɞɢɬɢ ɢ ɢɡ ɫɚɦɟ ɤɪɢɜɟ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ Ɍɚɱɧɢʁɢ ɩɪɢɫɬɭɩ ɭ
ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɭɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ʁɟ ɩɨɦɨʄɭ ɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɟ ɢɧɬɟɪɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɭɪɟɻɟɧɨɝ ɩɚɪɚ ɬɚɱɚɤɚ s,
ξ‫ݏ‬/ܳ) ɬɚɤɨ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɞɨɛɢʁɚ ɩɪɚɜɚ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɚ ɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɨɦ ξ‫ݏ‬/ܳ = ‫ܥ‬ଵ ‫ ݏ‬+ ‫ܥ‬ଶ Ƚɪɚɧɢɱɧɚ
ɫɢɥɚ ʁɟ ɬɚɞɚ ܳ௨ = 1/2ඥ‫ܥ‬ଵ ‫ܥ‬ଶ . Ⱥɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɚ ɡɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬ ɫɢɥɟ ɢ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ ɨɦɨɝɭʄɚɜɚ
ɩɨɭɡɞɚɧɭɟɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɭɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ
Chin-Kondner-ɨɜɚɟɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɚ
Ɂɚɫɥɟɝɚʃɚs ɤɨʁɚɫɭɭɩɨɞɪɭɱʁɭɜɟʄɢɯɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɢɜɟʄɢɯɦɟɪɟɧɢɯɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ
Q ɭɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɢɫɥɟɝɚʃɚsɚɩɪɨɤɫɢɦɢɪɚɫɟɯɢɩɟɪɛɨɥɨɦɭɨɛɥɢɤɭs/Q=C 1 s+C 2 ɝɞɟɫɭC 1 ɢ
C 2 ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɩɪɚɜɟɬɪɚɧɫɮɨɪɦɢɫɚɧɟɯɢɩɟɪɛɨɥɟɤɨʁɢɫɟɦɨɝɭɨɞɪɟɞɢɬɢɢɡɢɡɦɟɪɟɧɢɯ
ɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɚ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ Ʉɚɞɚ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɬɟɠɢ ɛɟɫɤɨɧɚɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɚɫɢɦɩɬɨɬɫɤɚ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚQ ɞɚʁɟɦɨɝɭʄɭɞɟɮɢɧɢɰɢʁɭɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɚɤɚɨQ u =1/C 1 .
10% D ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦ
Ƚɪɚɧɢɱɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɚɞɟɮɢɧɢɲɟɫɟɤɚɨɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɚɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɤɨʁɚɭɯɢɩɟɪɛɨɥɢɱɤɨɦ
ɨɩɢɫɭɞɚʁɟɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɭɫɥɟɝɚʃɚɨɞɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚɲɢɩɚɩɨɞɪɚɡɭɦɟɜɚʁɭʄɢɩɪɢɬɨɦɟɞɚɬɨ
ɦɨɠɟ ɛɢɬɢ ɢ ɟɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɢɪɚɧɚ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɭɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɧɢʁɟ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɨ ɞɨ ɨɜɟ
ɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɚ Ⱥɤɨ ɫɟ ɭɫɜɨʁɢ ɞɚ ʁɟ ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɚ ɫɢɥɚ ɩɪɢ ɥɨɦɭ ɬɥɚ ɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɚ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɤɨʁɚ ɢɡɚɡɢɜɚ ɫɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ ɲɢɩɚ D ɞɨɛɢʁɚ ɫɟ, ɞɚ ʁɟ ɩɪɟɦɚ
ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɦɚ C 1 ɢ C 2 (Chin-Kondner), ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɨ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ
Q u =0.1D/(0.1C 1 D+C 2 ).
ɇɚ ɫɥɢɤɚɦɚ ௅ ɫɭ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɟ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɢ ɤɪɢɜɟ ɩɪɟɦɚ Davisson-ɨɜɨɦ
ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɭ, Hansen-ɨɜɨɦ ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɭ ɢChin-Kondner-ɨɜɨʁ ɟɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɢ
ɚ ɛ
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɢɤɪɢɜɟɩɪɟɦɚDavisson-ɨɜɨɦɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɭɚɲɢɩ
ɒɛɲɢɩɒ
Figure 5. Calculated load-bearing capacities and curves according to Davisson's criterion:
a) pile ɒ1, b) pile ɒ2
391
ɚ ɛ
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɢɤɪɢɜɟɩɪɟɦɚHansen-ɨɜɨɦɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɭɚɲɢɩ
ɒɛɲɢɩɒ
Figure 6. Calculated load-bearing capacities and curves according to the Hansen criterion:
a) pile ɒ1, b) pile ɒ2
ɚ ɛ
ɋɥɢɤɚ7. ɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɢɤɪɢɜɟɩɪɟɦɚChin-Kondner-ɨɜɨʁɟɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɢɚ
ɲɢɩɒɛɲɢɩɒ
Figure 7. Calculated load-bearing capacities and curves according to Chin-Kondner
extrapolation: a) pile ɒ1, b) pile ɒ2
ɉɪɢɦɟɧɨɦ10%D ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɚɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɟɫɭɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ
଴.ଵ·଼଼଴
ܳ௨ = = 3500kNQ doz =1400kN ɡɚɲɢɩɒ,
଴.ଵ·଴.ଶହଵଵ·଼଼଴ାଷ.଴ଶସ
଴.ଵ·଼଼଴
ܳ௨ = = 4490kNQ doz =1800kN ɡɚɲɢɩɒ
଴.ଵ·଴.ଶ଴ଶ଼·଼଼଴ାଵ.଻ସ଴ଽ
ɁȺɄȴɍɑȺɄ
ɍ ɬɚɛɟɥɢ ʁɟ ɞɚɬ ɩɪɢɤɚɡ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ ɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɡɚ ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬ
ɫɢɝɭɪɧɨɫɬɢ ȿɮɟɤɚɬ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ ɲɢɩɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɡɢɬɢɜɚɧ ɭ ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɡɚɯɬɟɜɚɧɟ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɚ, ɩɨɦɨʄɭ ɩɨɞɚɬɚɤɚ ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯ ɢɡ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ
ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɲɢɩɚ, ɩɨɤɚɡɭʁɟɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɭɨɩɫɟɝɭɨɞkN௅400kN
ɤɚɨ ɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɇɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɟ ɢɡ ɩɨɞɚɬɚɤɚ CPT ɨɩɢɬɚ
ɚɤɨɫɟɩɨɫɦɚɬɪɚɭɡɛɢɪɭɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɨɦɨɬɚɱɚɢɛɚɡɟɧɢʁɟɪɟɩɪɟɡɟɧɬɚɬɢɜɧɚɊɟɚɥɧɢʁɟ ʁɟ
ɫɚɝɥɟɞɚɬɢ ɞɨɩɪɢɧɨɫ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚ ɞɭɠɢɧɟ ɧɚ ɤɨɦɩɨɧɟɧɬɭ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɩɨ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ ʁɟɪ ɞɨ
ɧɢɜɨɚ ɪɚɞɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɲɢɩ ɭɝɥɚɜɧɨɦ ɪɟɚɝɭʁɟ ɬɪɟʃɟɦ ɩɨ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ Ɍɚɤɨɻɟ
ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɩɨ ɞɨɦɚʄɟɦ ɩɪɚɜɢɥɧɢɤɭ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɩɨ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ ɨɞ
~1000kN ʁɟɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɢʁɟɲɬɨɬɪɟɛɚɭɡɟɬɢɫɚɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɨɦɪɟɡɟɪɜɨɦ
392
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚɉɪɢɤɚɡɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɨɜɚɡɚɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬ ɫɢɝɭɪɧɨɫɬɢ
2.5
Table 2. Results of load-bearing capacity of piles for safety factor 2.5
ɦɟɬɨɞɚ Q doz >N1@ɒ Q doz >N1@ɒ

Brinch-Hansen 990 1970
CPT 2200 2200
Davisson-ɨɜɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦ 840 1240
Hansen-ɨɜɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦ 1460 1800
Chin-Kondner-ɨɜɚɟɤɫɬɪɚɩɨɥɚɰɢʁɚ 1590 1970
10%·D ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦ 1400 1800
ɉɨɲɬɨɫɟɩɭɬɟɦɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɧɟɦɨɝɭɭɡɟɬɢɭɨɛɡɢɪɟɮɟɤɬɢɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɚ,
ɚɢɫɨɛɡɢɪɨɦɞɚʁɟɫɚɦɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɚɧɡɚɭɬɜɪɻɢɜɚʃɟɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɚɲɢɩɚ
ɭɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɢɦɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɦɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɨʁɟɫɩɪɨɜɟɫɬɢɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ
ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɦ ɢɥɢ ɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɨɦ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɦ ɑɟɫɬ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦ ʁɟ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɤɨɞ ɜɢɫɨɤɨɝ ɧɢɜɨɚ
ɩɨɞɡɟɦɧɟ ɜɨɞɟ ɇɉȼ ɭɫɥɟɞ ɧɟɭʁɟɞɧɚɱɟɧɨɝ ɇɉȼ ɭ ɨɛɥɨɠɧɨʁ ɰɟɜɢ ɢ ɬɟɪɟɧɭ ɩɨɞ
ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦɜɨɞɟɭɛɚɡɢɦɟʃɚɫɬɪɭɤɬɭɪɚɬɥɚɢɫɬɜɚɪɚɫɟɡɨɧɚɦɭʂɚɤɨʁɚɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɨɦɟʃɚ
ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɤɨɞɲɢɩɚɤɚɞɚɫɟɩɪɟɜɚɡɢɻɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɩɨɨɦɨɬɚɱɭɢɚɧɝɚɠɭʁɟɛɚɡɚ
ɲɢɩɚɁɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɢɩɪɢɦɟɪɦɨɠɟɫɟɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢɞɚɫɟɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟɦɞɭɠɢɧɟɲɢɩɚɨɫɢɝɭɪɚɜɚ
ɞɚɪɚɞɧɨɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦɨɠɟɞɚɩɪɟɧɟɫɟɨɦɨɬɚɱɲɢɩɚ
Davisson-ɨɜɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɞɚʁɟ ɧɚʁɧɢɠɟɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɭɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɭɫɚ
ɨɫɬɚɥɢɦ ɦɟɬɨɞɚɦɚ ɲɬɨ ɩɪɭɠɚ ɜɟʄɭ ɫɢɝɭɪɧɨɫɬ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɚɧɬɢɦɚ ɭɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɭɫɜɨʁɟ ɬɭ
ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɡɚ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ ɲɢɩɚ ɚɥɢ ɩɨɜɟʄɚɜɚ ɰɟɧɭ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɍ ɬɨɦ ɫɦɢɫɥɭ ʁɟ
ɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɧɨɫɩɪɨɜɟɫɬɢɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɫɚɦɨʁɟɞɧɨɦɦɟɬɨɞɨɦɉɪɟɨɫɬɚɥɚɬɪɢ ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɚɞɚʁɭ
ɩɪɢɛɥɢɠɧɟ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɚ ɍɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɫɟ ɭɫɜɨʁɢ ɞɚ ʁɟ ɪɟɩɪɟɡɟɧɬɚɬɢɜɧɚ
ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɚ ɒ1 1400kNɚɲɢɩɚɒ2 1800kNɲɬɨʁɟɧɚʁɧɢɠɚ
ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɡɚ ɩɪɟɨɫɬɚɥɟ ɬɪɢ ɦɟɬɨɞɟ ɦɨɠɟ ɫɟ ɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɦ ɲɢɩɚ
ɩɨɬɜɪɻɭʁɟɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɨɫɬɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚɞɭɠɢɧɟɡɚɛɟɡɛɟɞɧɨɩɪɟɧɨɲɟʃɟɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɧɚɜɟʄɟ
ɞɭɛɢɧɟ
ɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɨ-ɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɚɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɮɨɬɨɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɲɢɩɨɜɚȺɪɯɢɜɚ
ɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɚɂɆɋ.
ɆɢɥɚɧɆɚɤɫɢɦɨɜɢʄɆɟɯɚɧɢɤɚɬɥɚȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ.
ɋɥɨɛɨɞɚɧȶɨɪɢʄȽɟɨɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɢȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ.
393
Prethodno saopštenje
UDK 624.154.04
ɈɋɇɈȼȿ ɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȺɒɂɉɈȼȺ
ɏɈɊɂɁɈɇɌȺɅɇɈɆɋɂɅɈɆɋȺɉɊɂɆȿɊɂɆȺ
ɂɁɉɊȺɄɋȿ
ɆɚɪɢʁɚɄɪɫɬɢʄɇɢɤɨɥɚȻɨɠɨɜɢʄɆɚɪɤɨɉɪɢɰɚɄɪɢɫɬɢɧɚ
Ȼɨɠɢʄ-Ɍɨɦɢʄ
marija.krstic@institutims.rs
ɊȿɁɂɆȿ
ɍ ɪɚɞɭ ɫɟ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɭʁɟ ɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɢ ɨɩɢɬ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɦ ɫɢɥɨɦ ɉɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɚ ɫɭ ɬɪɢ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɯ ɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɢɯ
ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚ ɢ ɞɭɠɢɧɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɨ-ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɚ ɝɪɚɻɚ ɬɟɪɟɧɚ ɢ ɮɢɡɢɱɤɨ-
ɦɟɯɚɧɢɱɤɟɨɫɨɛɢɧɟɫɪɟɞɢɧɚɧɚ ɥɨɤɚɰɢʁɢɨɛʁɟɤɬɚɝɞɟɫɭɲɢɩɨɜɢɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɢɊɚɡɦɚɬɪɚʄɟ
ɫɟCFA ɲɢɩɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚmm ɤɨʁɢʁɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɭɉɚɧɱɟɜɭɛɭɲɟɧɢɲɢɩɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ
mm ɤɨʁɢʁɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɭɈɛɪɟɧɨɜɰɭɢɛɭɲɟɧɢɲɢɩɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚmm ɤɨʁɢʁɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɭ
Ȼɟɲɤɨʁɇɚɩɨɦɟɧɭɬɢɦɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɢɯɢɥɚɛɨɪɚɬɨɪɢʁɫɤɢɯɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚ
ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧʁɟɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɨɜɚ
ɄȴɍɑɇȿɊȿɑɂɲɢɩɨɜɢɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧa ɫɢɥaɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ
FUNDAMENTALS OF PILE TESTING USING

HORIZONTAL FORCE WITH EXAMPLES FROM
PRACTICE
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a field experiment of a static pile load on a horizontal force. Three pile
tests of different cross-sections and pile lengths are presented, as well as the geological-
geotechnical structure of the terrain and the physical-mechanical properties of environments
at the location of the object where the piles were made. Consideration will be given to a CFA
pile Ø600 mm in diameter in Pancevo, a drilled pile Ø880 mm in Obrenovac and a drilled
pile Ø1500 mm in Beška. Based on field and laboratory investigations, the load-bearing
capacity calculation of mentioned piles is shown.
KEY WORDS: piles, testing, horizontal force, load-bearing capacity
ɍȼɈȾ
ɉɪɢɥɢɤɨɦ ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚʃɚ ɨɛʁɟɤɚɬɚ ɧɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ ɩɨɪɟɞ ɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɢɯ ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɢɯ ɫɢɥɚ

ʁɚɜʂɚʁɭ ɫɟ ɢ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɢ ɦɨɦɟɧɬɢ Ɉɜɚ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɥɧɚ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɩɨɬɢɱɭ ɨɞ
394
ɞɟʁɫɬɜɚ ɜɟɬɪɚ ɞɟʁɫɬɜɚ ɬɚɥɚɫɚ ɧɚ ɧɚɮɬɧɢɦ ɩɥɚɬɨɢɦɚ ɨɞ ɞɟʁɫɬɜɚ ɫɟɢɡɦɢɱɤɢɯ ɫɢɥɚ
ɩɪɢɥɢɤɨɦ ɡɟɦʂɨɬɪɟɫɚ ɢ ɞɪ ɍ ɨɜɨɦ ɫɥɭɱɚʁɭ ɨɞ ɧɚʁɜɟʄɟɝ ɡɧɚɱɚʁɚ ʁɟ ɲɬɨ ɫɟ ɬɚɱɧɢʁɟ
ɩɪɟɞɜɢɞɟɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɢɯɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɢɦɨɦɟɧɚɬɚɫɚɜɢʁɚʃɚʁɟɪɫɭɫɜɟɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟ
ɦɟɪɨɞɚɜɧɟɡɚɞɢɦɟɧɡɢɨɧɢɫɚʃɟɨɜɚɤɨɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɢɯɲɢɩɨɜɚɚɨɞʃɢɯɬɚɤɨɻɟɭɦɧɨɝɨɦɟ
ɡɚɜɢɫɢɫɬɚɛɢɥɧɨɫɬɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ
Ɂɚ ɩɪɨɛɧɢ ɲɢɩ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɫɟ ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚ ɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɞɨ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ
ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɟɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɨɦɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɤɨʁɚɬɪɟɛɚɞɚʁɟʁɟɞɧɚɤɚɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɟ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɚɁɚɪɚɞɧɢɲɢɩɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɫɟɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɚɥɧɨ
ɞɨ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɟ ɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɨɦ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɤɨʁɚ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɞɚ ʁɟ ʁɟɞɧɚɤɚ
ɮɚɤɬɨɪɢɫɚɧɨʁ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɟ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɚ ɍɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɫɟ
ɪɚɡɦɚɬɪɚɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɬɢɜɧɚɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɬɚɞɚɫɟɨɧɚɨɞɪɟɻɭʁɟɢɡɭɫɥɨɜɚɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɟ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ ɭɬɢɰɚʁɟ ɦɨɦɟɧɬɚ ɫɚɜɢʁɚʃɚ ɍɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɫɟ ɪɚɡɦɚɬɪɚ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɚ
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɬɚɞɚɫɟɨɧɚɨɞɪɟɻɭʁɟɢɡɭɫɥɨɜɚɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɫɬɢ
ɬɥɚ ȼɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɚ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɞɚ ʁɟ ʁɟɞɧɚɤɚ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɭɤɭɩɧɨɝ
ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ
Ɍɟɫɬɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɲɢɩɚɦɨɠɟɫɟɫɩɪɨɜɨɞɢɬɢɩɪɢɦɟɧɨɦɞɜɚɜɚɪɢʁɚɧɬɧɚ
ɪɟɲɟʃɚ ɬɟɫɬ ɫ ɪɟɚɤɬɢɜɧɢɦ ɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ ɋɥɢɤɚ ɞɟʁɫɬɜɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ
ɪɟɚɥɢɡɭʁɟ ɫɟ ɭɫɥɟɞ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝ ɨɞɭɩɢɪɚʃɚ ɩɪɟɫɟ ɨ ɪɟɚɤɬɢɜɧɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɟ ɢ ɬɟɫɬ ɫ
ɤɨɧɬɪɚɬɟɪɟɬɨɦ ɋɥɢɤɚ ɞɟʁɫɬɜɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɪɟɚɥɢɡɭʁɟ ɫɟ ɭɫɥɟɞ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝ ɨɞɭɩɢɪɚʃɚɩɪɟɫɟɨɞɟʁɫɬɜɨɫɨɩɫɬɜɟɧɟɬɟɠɢɧɟɤɨɧɬɪɬɟɪɟɬɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚȻɚɥɚɫɬɡɚɨɞɭɩɢɪɚʃɟɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧɨɞɋɥɢɤɚȻɚɥɚɫɬɡɚɨɞɭɩɢɪɚʃɟɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧɨɞ
ɱɟɥɢɱɧɨɝɩɪɨɮɢɥɚɢɪɟɚɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɲɢɩɨɜɚɱɟɥɢɱɧɨɝɩɪɨɮɢɥɚɢɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɢɯɛɥɨɤɨɜɚ
Figure 1. Resistant ballast made of Figure 2. Resistant ballast made of
steel profile and reaction piles steel profile and concrete blocks
ɉɈɋɌɍɉȺɄɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȺ
ɉɨɫɬɭɩɚɤɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɲɢɩɚɩɪɨɛɧɢɦɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦɫɚɫɬɨʁɢɫɟɨɞɫɥɟɞɟʄɢɯɨɩɟɪɚɰɢʁɚ
- ɉɨɫɬɭɩɧɨɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɫɢɥɟɭɲɢɩɭɞɨɩɨɫɬɢɡɚʃɚɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɟɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɟ
ɫɢɥɟɢɦɟɪɟʃɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚɡɚɫɜɚɤɢɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚɫɢɥɟ
ɭʃɟɦɭ
395
- Ɇɟɪɟʃɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚɫɟɜɪɲɢɧɚɞɜɟɮɢɤɫɢɪɚɧɟɬɚɱɤɟɩɨɦɨʄɭ
ɤɨɦɩɚɪɚɬɟɪɚɏɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚɫɟɨɞɪɟɻɭʁɟɤɚɨɚɪɢɬɦɟɬɢɱɤɚɫɪɟɞɢɧɚ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɢɯɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɨɜɟɞɜɟɮɢɤɫɧɟɬɚɱɤɟ
ɌȿɊȿɇɋɄȺɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȺ
ɂɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɲɢɩɚɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɦɩɪɨɛɧɢɦɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɦɫɢɥɨɦɢɡɜɪɲɟɧɨ
ʁɟ ɨɩɢɬɨɦ ɭ ɤɨɦɟ ʁɟ ɤɚɨ ɩɨɬɢɫɧɨ ɫɪɟɞɫɬɜɨ ɭɩɨɬɪɟɛʂɟɧɚ ɩɪɟɫɚ ɤɨʁɚ ʁɟ ɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɚ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɭɨɞɧɨɫɭɧɚɝɥɚɜɭɲɢɩɚɉɪɟɫɚɫɟɨɞɭɩɢɪɟɨɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɭɡɚɨɞɭɩɢɪɚʃɟ
ɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧɭɨɞɱɟɥɢɱɧɨɝɩɪɨɮɢɥɚɢɞɜɚɪɟɚɤɰɢɨɧɚɲɢɩɚɋɥɢɤɚɢɥɢɤɨɧɬɪɚɬɟɪɟɬɬʁ
ɛɚɥɚɫɬɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧɨɞɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɢɯɛɥɨɤɨɜɚɢɱɟɥɢɱɧɨɝɩɪɨɮɢɥɚɋɥɢɤɚ
ɋɢɥɚɤɨʁɨɦɫɟɜɪɲɢɥɨɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɚʁɟɩɭɬɟɦɩɪɟɫɟɤɨʁɚɫɟɨɞɭɩɢɪɟɨɛɚɥɚɫɬ
ɂɡɦɟɻɭ ɩɪɟɫɟ ɢ ɨɩɢɬɧɟ ɝɪɟɞɟ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɩɪɟɫɟ ɢ ɝɥɚɜɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɢ ɫɭ
ɩɨɞɦɟɬɚɱɢ ɞɨɜɨʂɧɨ ɨɬɩɨɪɧɢ ɞɚ ɪɚɜɧoɦɟɪɧɨ ɩɪɟɧɟɫɭ ɫɢɥɭ ɧɚ ɝɨɪʃɭ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɭ
ɨɞɧɨɫɧɨɧɚɲɢɩȼɟɥɢɱɢɧɚɩɨɞɦɟɬɚɱɚɧɢʁɟɛɢɥɚɦɚʃɚɨɞɧɚʁɜɟʄɟɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɤɨɧɬɚɤɬɚɭ
ɤɨʁɢɫɟɭɦɟɬɚɥɚ
Ɇɟɪɟʃɟɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɨɝɲɢɩɚɩɪɚɬɢɥɨɫɟɧɚɞɜɚɞɢɝɢɬɚɥɧɚɤɨɦɩɚɪɚɬɟɪɚɤɨʁɢ
ɫɭɛɢɥɢɜɟɡɚɧɢɡɚɪɟɮɟɪɟɧɬɧɟɝɪɟɞɟɩɨɞɭɝɥɨɦɨɞÛ
ɉɊɈɊȺɑɍɇɇɈɋɂȼɈɋɌɂɒɂɉɈȼȺɍɋɅȿȾɏɈɊɂɁɈɇɌȺɅɇɈȽ
ɈɉɌȿɊȿȶȿȵȺ
ɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɭɬɢɰɚʁɚ ɭ ɲɢɩɭ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɨɝ ɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɢɦ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɢɦ

ɫɜɨɞɢ ɫɟ ɧɚ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɭɬɢɰɚʁɚ ɭ ɟɤɜɢɜɚɥɟɧɬɧɨɦ ɪɚɦɭ ɒɢɩ ʁɟ ɩɨɞɟʂɟɧ ɧɚ
ɝɪɟɞɧɟ ɤɨɧɚɱɧɟ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɬɟ ɞɨɤ ɫɟ ɭɬɢɰɚʁ ɬɥɚ ɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɟ ɫɢɫɬɟɦɨɦ ɩɪɨɫɬɢɯ ɲɬɚɩɨɜɚ
ɛɨɱɧɢɯɨɩɪɭɝɚɱɢʁɟɫɭɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɢɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɟɩɪɟɦɚɩɪɨɮɟɫɨɪɭȼɟɫɢʄɭ
଴.଺ 12 ா௦‫כ‬ோర * ா௦
Kh= * ට
ோ ா௣‫כ‬ூ௣ ଵି௩ మ
P
ɝɞɟ ʁɟ ȿs ɦɨɞɭɥ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɬɥɚ, ȿp ɦɨɞɭɥ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ

ɨɞ ɤɨɝɚ ʁɟ ɲɢɩ ɧɚɩɪɚɜʂɟɧ, v ɉɨɚɫɨɧɨɜ ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬ ɬɥɚ, Ip ɦɨɦɟɧɚɬ
ɢɧɟɪɰɢʁɟ ɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝ ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚ ɲɢɩɚ. Ɇɨɞɭɥ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɬɥɚ ȿs ɫɟ
ɨɞɪɟɻɭʁɟɩɨɦɨʄɭɟɞɨɦɟɬɚɪɫɤɨɝɦɨɞɭɥɚɫɬɢɲʂɢɜɨɫɬɢɆv.
ɋɥɢɤɚ Ⱦɢɫɩɨɡɢɰɢʁɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɡɚ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɧɚ ɞɟʁɫɬɜɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝ

ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ
Figure 3. Disposition of the calculation pile on the effect of horizontal loading
396
ɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȿɒɂɉȺɏɈɊɂɁɈɇɌȺɅɇɈɆɋɂɅɈɆɁȺɈȻȳȿɄȺɌ
ɌȿɊɆɈȿɅȿɄɌɊȺɇȿɌɈɉɅȺɇȿɍɉȺɇɑȿȼɍ
ɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɂɆɋɚɞɐɟɧɬɚɪɡɚɩɭɬɟɜɟɢɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɤɭȻɭɥɟɜɚɪɜɨʁɜɨɞɟɆɢɲɢʄɚɢɡ
Ȼɟɨɝɪɚɞɚ ʁɟ ɢɡɜɪɲɢɨ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟ CFA ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ mm ɨɩɢɬɨɦ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ
ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɦ ɫɢɥɨɦ ɡɚ ɨɛʁɟɤɚɬ ɌȿɊɆɈȿɅȿɄɌɊȺɇȿ
ɌɈɉɅȺɇȿɍɉȺɇɑȿȼɍ
ɉɈȾȺɐɂɈɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵɍɒɂɉȺ
ɂɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɢ ɲɢɩ ɭ ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɬɟɯɧɨɥɨɝɢʁɟ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ CFA ɲɢɩ ɤɪɭɠɧɨɝ ɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝ

ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚɱɢʁɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɢɡɧɨɫɢmm. Ⱦɭɠɢɧɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɨɝɲɢɩɚɩɪɟɦɚɩɚɫɨɲɭɲɢɩɚ
ɢɡɧɨɫɢ/ P
ɋɥɢɤɚɊɭɱɧɚɩɭɦɩɚɩɪɟɫɟɢɋɥɢɤɚȾɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚɩɪɢ
ɞɢɝɢɬɚɥɧɢɦɟɪɧɢɫɚɬɤɨɦɩɚɪɚɬɟɪ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭɢɪɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭ
Figure 4. Hand pump, presses and Figure 5. Diagram of movement of top of the pile
digital measurement clock (comparator) during loading and unloading
ɍɩɢɬɚʃɭʁɟɪɚɞɧɢɲɢɩɬɚɤɨɞɚɫɟɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɫɩɪɨɜɟɥɨɞɨɪɚɞɧɟɫɢɥɟɤɚɤɨʁɟɬɪɚɠɟɧɨ
ɨɞɫɬɪɚɧɟɂɡɜɨɻɚɱɚɪɚɞɨɜɚɆɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟɲɢɩɚɧɚɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨʁ
ɫɢɥɢ ɨɩɢɬɚQmax=180kN ɢɡɧɨɫɢ s=19.86mm Ɋɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ʁɟ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɨ ɭ ɬɪɢ
ɤɨɪɚɤɚ
ɉɪɢ ɧɚɧɨɲɟʃɭ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɨɞ kN ɞɨɲɥɨ ʁɟ ɞɨ ɤɨɧɫɬɚɧɬɧɨɝ ɪɚɡɜɨʁɚ
ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɇɚɤɨɧɩɨɫɬɢɡɚʃɚɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɟɫɢɥɟɢɨɞɪɠɚɜɚʃɚɨɞɦɢɧɭɬɚɡɚɩɨɱɟɬɨʁɟ
ɪɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɲɢɩɚʁɟɪʁɟɩɪɢɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨɦɢɧɤɪɟɦɟɧɬɭɞɨɲɥɨɞɨɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɢʁɟɝɪɚɡɜɨʁɚ
ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟɉɪɨɰɟʃɟɧɨʁɟɞɚɛɢɞɚʂɢɦɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɦɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨɦɢɫɩɢɬɧɨɦɫɢɥɨɦ
ɧɚɫɬɭɩɢɨ ɪɚɡɜɨʁ ɧɟɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɢɯ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ ɬɚɤɜɨɝ ɬɢɩɚ ɞɚ ɛɢ ɞɨɲɥɨ ɞɨ ɞɨɫɬɢɡɚʃɚ
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɨɝɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɬɢɜɧɨɝɫɬɚʃɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɚ
ɉɪɢɥɢɤɨɦ ɩɥɚɧɢɪɚʃɚ ɢ ɫɩɪɨɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɜɨɻɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨ ɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɨ

ɜɢɬɚɥɧɢɦ ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢɦɚ ɲɢɩɚ ɫ ɨɛɡɢɪɨɦ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɪɚɞɢ ɨ ɪɚɞɧɨɦ ɲɢɩɭ ɲɢɩ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ
ɤɨɪɢɫɬɢɭɟɤɫɩɥɨɚɬɚɰɢʁɢ
397
ɋɥɢɤɚɁɟɜɢɡɦɟɻɭɬɥɚɢɲɢɩɚ
Figure 6. A gape between the ground and the pile
ɌɚɛɟɥɚȼɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɚɬɚɛɨɱɧɟɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɢɄh
Table 1. Value of lateral stiffness coefficients Kh
R Ip Ep Mv v Es Kh
ɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱɟɧɢɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢ m m4 Gpa kPa - kPa kN/m3
ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɚɩɪɚɲɢɧɚ 0.6 0.006362 34 10000 0.5 6666.67 6078
ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɢɩɟɫɚɤ 0.6 0.006362 34 20000 0.5 13333.33 12878
ɩɟɫɚɤ 0.6 0.006362 34 400000 0.5 26666.66 27287
ɍɩɨɫɬɭɩɤɭɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɥɨɫɟɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɟɫɟɪɢʁɨɦɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɨ-
ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢɯ ɨɩɪɭɝɚ ɫ ɬɢɦ ɲɬɨ ɫɟ ɤɪɭɬɨɫɬ ɫɜɚɤɟ ɨɩɪɭɝɟ
ɢɡɪɚɠɚɜɚɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɨɦɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɢ
ɉɪɢɤɚɡɚɧʁɟɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟuɤɨʁɢʁɟ
ɝɟɧɟɪɢɫɚɧ ɭ ɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɫɤɨɦ ɩɚɤɟɬɭTower Ɂɚ ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɭ
ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɭ ɫɢɥɭ ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ
24.76mm.
Ɇɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ
ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨʁ ɫɢɥɢ ɨɩɢɬɚ ʁɟ ɭ ɨɩɫɟɝɭ ɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɢɯ
ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɢɯɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚȾɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟɞɭɠɫɬɚɛɥɚɲɢɩɚ
Figure 7. Diagram of horizontal deformation along the pile
ɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȿɒɂɉȺɏɈɊɂɁɈɇɌȺɅɇɈɆɋɂɅɈɆɁȺɈȻȳȿɄȺɌɁȺ
ɉɈɋɌɊɈȳȿȵȿɁȺɈȾȽɁȺɌȿɇɂɄɈɅȺɌȿɋɅȺɍɈȻɊȿɇɈȼɐɍ
Ȼɟɨɝɪɚɞɚ ʁɟ ɢɡɜɪɲɢɨ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ mm ɨɩɢɬɨɦ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ
ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɧɚɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɭɫɢɥɭɡɚɉɨɫɬɪɨʁɟʃɟɡɚɈȾȽɡɚɌȿɇɢɤɨɥɚɌɟɫɥɚ
ɭɈɛɪɟɧɨɜɰɭ
398
ɂɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɢɲɢɩɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɬɟɯɧɨɥɨɝɢʁɟɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚɛɭɲɟɧɢɲɢɩɤɪɭɠɧɨɝɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝ
ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚɱɢʁɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɢɡɧɨɫɢmmȾɭɠɢɧɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɨɝɲɢɩɚɩɪɟɦɚɩɨɞɚɰɢɦɚ
ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɦɨɞɂɡɜɨɻɚɱɚɪɚɞɨɜɚɢɡɧɨɫɢL= 13.0 m.
ɋɥɢɤɚɊɭɱɧɚɩɭɦɩɚɢɩɪɟɫɟɋɥɢɤɚȾɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚɩɪɢɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭɢ
Ɋɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭ
Figure 8. Hand pump and presses Figure 9. Diagram of movement of top of the pile
during loading and unloading
ɍɩɢɬɚʃɭʁɟɬɟɫɬɧɢɲɢɩɬɚɤɨɞɚʁɟɜɪɲɟɧɨɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɭɞɜɚɰɢɤɥɭɫɚɉɪɜɢɰɢɤɥɭɫ
ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚʁɟɜɪɲɟɧɞɨɪɚɞɧɟɫɢɥɟɞɨɤʁɟɞɪɭɝɢɰɢɤɥɭɫɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɪɚɻɟɧɞɨ
ɪɚɞɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɏɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨʁ ɫɢɥɢ Qd=200kN ɢɡɧɨɫɢ
s=4.85mmɊɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɲɢɩɚɭɞɪɭɝɨɦɰɢɤɥɭɫɭʁɟɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɨɭɱɟɬɢɪɢɤɨɪɚɤɚ
R Ip Ep Mv v Es Kh
ɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱɟɧɢ
ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢ m m4 Gpa kPa - kPa kN/m3
ɚɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɢ
ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɢɲʂɭɧɚɤ 0.88 0.0294 31.5 16100 0.5 10733.33 6986
ɚɥɭɜɢʁɚɥɧɢɩɟɫɚɤ 0.6 0.0294 31.5 15400 0.5 7700 4875
ɍ ɩɨɫɬɭɩɤɭ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɬɥɨ ɫɟ ɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɟ ɫɟɪɢʁɨɦ ɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɨ-

ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢɯɨɩɪɭɝɚɫɬɢɦɲɬɨɫɟɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɫɜɚɤɟɨɩɪɭɝɟɢɡɪɚɠɚɜɚ
ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɨɦ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟ ɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɢ ɉɪɢɤɚɡɚɧ ʁɟ ɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟ u ɤɨʁɢ ʁɟ ɝɟɧɟɪɢɫɚɧ ɭ ɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɫɤɨɦ
ɩɚɤɟɬɭ Tower Ɂɚ ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɭ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɭ ɫɢɥɭ ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɨ ʁɟ
ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ mm. Ɇɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ
ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨʁ ɫɢɥɢ ɨɩɢɬɚ ʁɟ ɭ ɨɩɫɟɝɭ
ɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɢɯɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɢɯɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚ
Figure 10. Diagram of horizontal deformation along the pile tree
399
ɂɋɉɂɌɂȼȺȵȿɒɂɉȺɏɈɊɂɁɈɇɌȺɅɇɈɆɋɂɅɈɆɁȺɈȻȳȿɄȺɌ
ȼɂȳȺȾɍɄɌɍȻȿɒɄɈȳ
Ȼɟɨɝɪɚɞɚʁɟɢɡɜɪɲɢɨɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɲɢɩɚɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚmm ɨɩɢɬɨɦɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ
ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɦ ɫɢɥɨɦ ɡɚ ɨɛʁɟɤɚɬ ȼɢʁɚɞɭɤɬ ɧɚ km:51+423.75,
Ȼɟɲɤɚ
ɂɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɢɲɢɩɭɩɨɝɥɟɞɭɬɟɯɧɨɥɨɝɢʁɟɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚɛɭɲɟɧɢɲɢɩɤɪɭɠɧɨɝɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝ
ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚɱɢʁɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɢɡɧɨɫɢmm. Ⱦɭɠɢɧɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚɧɨɝɛɭɲɟɧɨɝɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɲɢɩɚ
ɢɡɧɨɫɢ/ P
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɭɦɩɚɢɩɪɟɫɟɋɥɢɤɚȾɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɜɪɯɚɲɢɩɚɩɪɢɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭɢ
ɪɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɭ
Figure 11. Pump and presses Figure 12. Diagram of movement of top of the pile
during loading and unloading
ɍɩɢɬɚʃɭʁɟɬɟɫɬɧɢɲɢɩɬɚɤɨɞɚʁɟɜɪɲɟɧɨɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɟɭɞɜɚɰɢɤɥɭɫɚɉɪɜɢɰɢɤɥɭɫ
ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚʁɟɜɪɲɟɧɞɨɪɚɞɧɟɫɢɥɟɞɨɤʁɟɞɪɭɝɢɰɢɤɥɭɫɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɪɚɻɟɧɞɨ
ɪɚɞɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ Ɇɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨʁ ɫɢɥɢ
Qmax=400kN ɢɡɧɨɫɢs=4.55mmɊɚɫɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɲɢɩɚɭɞɪɭɝɨɦɰɢɤɥɭɫɭʁɟɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɨɭ
ɱɟɬɢɪɢɤɨɪɚɤɚ
R Ip Ep Mv v Es Kh
ɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱɟɧɢɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢ m m4 Gpa kPa - kPa kN/m3
ɥɟɫ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ 1.2 0.10179 31.5 15000 0.5 10000 4745
ɩɨɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɨɝɫɚɫɬɚɜɚ
ɝɥɢɧɨɜɢɬɨ ɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɨ 1.2 0.10179 31.5 25000 0.5 16666.66 8252
ɩɟɫɤɨɜɢɬɢɫɟɞɢɦɟɧɬɢ
400
ɍɩɨɫɬɭɩɤɭɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɥɨɫɟɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɟɫɟɪɢʁɨɦɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɨ-
ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɢɯ ɨɩɪɭɝɚ ɫ ɬɢɦ ɲɬɨ ɫɟ ɤɪɭɬɨɫɬ ɫɜɚɤɟ ɨɩɪɭɝɟ
ɢɡɪɚɠɚɜɚɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬɨɦɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɤɪɭɬɨɫɬɢ
ɉɪɢɤɚɡɚɧʁɟɞɢʁɚɝɪɚɦɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟu ɤɨʁɢʁɟ
ɝɟɧɟɪɢɫɚɧɭɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɫɤɨɦɩɚɤɟɬɭTowerɁɚɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɧɭ
ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɭ ɫɢɥɭ ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ
20.32mm.
Ɇɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨ ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ

ɦɚɤɫɢɦɚɥɧɨʁ ɫɢɥɢ ɨɩɢɬɚ ʁɟ ɭ ɨɩɫɟɝɭ ɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɢɯ
ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɨɦɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɢɯɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚ
Figure 13. Diagram of horizontal deformation along the pile tree
ɁȺɄȴɍɑȺɄ
ɇɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɨ ʁɟ ɢɫɩɢɬɚɬɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɟ ɤɚɤɨ ɛɢ ɢɦɚɥɢ ɭɜɢɞ ɭ ɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɩɪɢ
ɩɪɢɦɟʃɟɧɢɦɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɢɦɚɭɜɪɟɦɟɧɭɆɨɪɚɫɟɜɨɞɢɬɢɬɢɪɚɱɭɧɚɞɚɧɟɞɨɻɟɞɨɪɚɡɜɨʁɚ
ɧɟɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɢɯ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɞɨ ɞɨɫɬɢɡɚʃɚ ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɨɝ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɬɢɜɧɨɝ ɫɬɚʃɚ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɲɢɩɚɇɚɨɫɧɨɜɭɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɝɲɢɩɚɧɚɬɟɪɟɧɭ
ɭɬɜɪʄɭʁɭɫɟɤɨɧɚɱɧɟɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɟɢɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɲɢɩɨɜɚ
Ɂɚ ɨɛɟɡɛɟɻɟʃɟ ɫɬɚɛɢɥɧɨɫɬɢ ɢ ɮɭɧɤɰɢɧɚɥɧɨɫɬɢ ɨɛʁɟɤɬɚ ɨɞ ɡɧɚɱɚʁɚ ɫɭ ɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟ

ɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɲɢɩɨɜɚȼɟɥɢɱɢɧɟɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɨɝɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚ ɲɢɩɚɪɨɬɚɰɢʁɟ
ɦɨɦɟɧɚɬɚɫɚɜɢʁɚʃɚɢɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɢɯɫɢɥɚɡɚɜɢɫɟɨɞɜɢɲɟɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɚɪɚɈɞɧɚʁɜeʄɟɝɡɧɚɱɚʁɚ
ɫɭɩɨɪɟɞɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚɤɨʁɟɞɟɥɭʁɟɧɚɲɢɩɦɨɞɟɥɬɥɚɨɞɧɨɫɧɨɫɚɫɬɚɜɬɥɚɨɤɨɲɢɩɚɜɪɫɬɚ
ɢ ɪɟɞɨɫɥɟɞ ɫɥɨʁɟɜɚ ʃɢɯɨɜɟ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢɨɧɟ ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɟ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɪɟɥɚɬɢɜɧɚ ɤɪɭɬɨɫɬ
ɲɢɩɚ Ⱦɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɫɤɢ ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɢ ȿs ɢ Ʉh ɫɩɚɞɚʁɭ ɦɟɻɭ ɧɚʁɡɧɚɱɚʁɧɢʁɟ ɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɪɟ ɨɞ
ɤɨʁɢɯɡɚɜɢɫɢɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɟɲɢɩɚɩɪɢɞɟʁɫɬɜɭɯɨɪɢɡɨɧɬɚɥɧɟɫɢɥɟɢɦɨɦɟɧɬɚ
Ɂɛɨɝɫɜɟɝɚɝɨɪɟɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɨɝɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɤɚʁɟɞɚɫɟɩɪɜɨɛɢɬɧɨɢɡɜɟɞɟɬɟɫɬɧɢɲɢɩɧɚɨɫɧɨɜɭ
ɱɢʁɟɝ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɛɢ ɫɟ ɟɜɟɧɬɭɚɥɧɨ ɤɨɪɢɝɨɜɚɥɟ ɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɟ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɟ ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɇɚɤɨɧ
ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɨɝɬɟɫɬɧɨɝɲɢɩɚɢɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɢɯɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚɦɨɠɟɫɟɩɪɢɫɬɭɩɢɬɢɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɭɪɚɞɧɢɯ
ɲɢɩɨɜɚ
ɌɟɯɧɢɱɤɚɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɮɨɬɨɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɡȺɪɯɢɜɟɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɚɂɆɋ
ɋɥɨɛɨɞɚɧȶɨɪɢʄȽɟɨɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɢȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ
401
UDK 624.131.52
PILE FOUNDATION OF A BUILDING IN

DIFFICULT SUBSOIL CONDITIONS
Irena Sulay*, Nikola Krotev**, Lena Mihova*
* University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia, Bulgaria
** FERA Consultants Pte. Ltd, Vsevolod Garshin 8, fl 2. Sofia 1619, Bulgaria
ABSTRACT:
The raft-pile foundation of a 14-storey building in Singapore is designed. The subsoil of the
building consists of weak marine and alluvial deposits in depth up to 30-40 m. 220 bored piles
with a length of 29-47 m and a diameter of 800-1800 mm are integrated by a foundation plate
which has “caps” above groups of piles or single piles. Different approaches for determining
of the pile’s bearing capacity are applied: empirical and analytical methods involved in
National Bulgarian and Singapore standards, numerical analyses, in situ tests. 3D finite
element models of the system “building structure-foundation structure-subsoil” are created
using ETABS software and PLAXIS software. Soil-structure interaction is approximated
using either Winkler springs model or a model of finite element discretization of the soil body
based on advanced constitutive law for soil. Comparative analysis is made of the results from
different solutions.
TEMELJNI ŠIPOVI ZGRADE U TEŠKIMUSLOVIMA PODTLA
REZIME:
Projektovani su temelnji šipovi zgrade od 14 spratova u Singapuru. Podtlo ispod zgrade
sastoji se od slabih morskih i aluvijalnih naslaga dubine do 30-40 m. 220 bušenih šipova
dužine 29-47 m i SUHþQLND-PPLQWHJULVDQLVXWHPHOMQRPSORþRPNRMDLPDþHSRYH
L]QDGJUXSDLOLSRMHHGLQDþQLKãLSRYD3ULPMHQMXMXVHUD]OLþLWLSULVWXSL]DRGUHÿLYDQMHQRVLYRVWL
ãLSRYD HPSLULMVNH L DQDOLWLþNH PHWRGH XNOMXþHQH X QDFLRQDOQH EXJDUVNH L VLQJDSXUVNH
staQGDUGH QXPHULþNH DQDOL]H LQ VLWX LVSLWLYDQMD ' PRGHOL NRQDþQLK HOHPHQDWD VLVWHPD
„konstrukcija zgrade-temelji-WOR³ NUHLUDQL VX NRULãüHQMHP (7$%6 VRIWYHUD L 3/$;,6
softvera. Interakcija tlo-konstrukcija aproksimirana je modelom Vinkler opruga ili
diskreWL]DFLMRP PRGHOD NRQDþQLK HOHPHQDWD WHOD QD RVQRYX QDSUHGQRJ NRQVWLWXWLYQLK
MHGQDþLQD]DWOR8UDÿHQDMHXSRUHGQDDQDOL]DUH]XOWDWDUD]OLþLWLKUHãHQMD
INTRODUCTION
Study is presented on the foundation structure of the 14-floors Paya Lebar Sqr. building with
area of 8400 m2 in Singapore (Fig.1, Fig. 2).
402
Fig. 1. Site of the building Fig. 2. View of the building
GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
Singapore is an island city-state which is a decisive factor for the types of formed soil layers.
At the site of the building there are predominantly old alluvial deposits. These soil deposits
generally have a top layer of marine clay below which there are layers of sandy clay and
sandy silt. The stiff sand layers appear generally at depth of 30-35m bellow the surface (Fig.
3).
FP71 FP72 FP39 FP40
Fig. 3. Geological profiles of the piles: FP71, FP72, FP39, FP40 (see Fig. 4.)
403
FOUNDATION STRUCTURE
The choice of the type of a foundation structure is based on the mechanical properties of the
soil ground. For this purpose standard and some specific experiments (Kerenchev 2013-2014
[11]) is necessary to perform and an optimal design decision to develop. This design
procedure is applied in references [8], [6] (Ilov, Tocev&Dikov 2010) for the foundation
structure of a multi-floor building.
The foundation of the Paya Lebar Sqr. building is a raft-pile structure which consists of 220
bored piles with diameters of ø800, ø1000, ø1200, ø1300, ø1500, ø1800 mm and
foundation slab with predominant thickness of 0,30 m. The length of the piles varies from 36
to 43 m. The thickness of the foundation slab in a local area around groups of piles or single
piles is 1,20 m (“pile cap”).
Fig. 4. Raft-pile structure of the building
The choice of the piles’ diameter and length is controlled with design requirements. It is
necessary the external loading of the pile equals the bearing capacity of the pile material. On
the other hand, it is necessary the bearing capacity of the pile material equals the geotechnical
capacity of the pile. The geotechnical capacity depends on the pile dimensions and the soil
ground properties. According to these considerations all piles are constructed of a reinforced
concrete only at the length of 12 m below the foundation slab.
BEARING CAPACITY OF PILES FP71, FP72, FP39, FP40
The bearing capacity of piles FP71, FP72, FP39, FP40 (Fig. 4) is considered in detail. The
structural and geotechnical capacities of the piles are determined. In addition, test loading of
piles are carried out according to Bi-directional and Kentledge methods.
404
STRUCTURAL CAPACITY OF PILES
The Standard BDS EN 1992-1-1 [1] defines the structural capacity of unreinforced elements
by the concrete compressive strength. The structural capacity ܴ௞ of a pile is defined as:
ܴ௞ = ‫ܣ‬௣௜௟௘ . ݂௖,௞,௥௘ௗ . (1)
where: ‫ܣ‬௣௜௟௘ is the pile cross section area; ݂௖,௞,௥௘ௗ is the concrete compressive strength.
GEOTECHNICAL CAPACITY OF PILES
Eurocode 7 is the present Bulgarian Standard. There are many studies in Bulgaria about the
applying the concepts of Eurocode 7 for bearing capacity analysis of ”soil-srtucture”
systems. References (Kostova, 2011 [13], [14], 2018 [15]) place special emphasis on the
principles and procedures for the soil bearing capacity determining. The authors
Kerenchev&Markov (2016) [12] apply common methods and advanced numerical solutions
for determining of piles bearing capacity.
The following methods for geotechnical bearing capacity which are recommended in
Standards of Bulgaria and Singapore are discussed:
o Meyerhof’s method (1976) [16];
o DIN 1054 (2005) [7];
o Bulgarian standard for pile foundation design (1993) [3].
In addition, alternative numerical analyses are performed by the Plaxis FE software:

o FE solution with soil constitutive model of Mohr-Coulomb;
o FE solution with constitutive model Hardening Soil (HS).
Geotechnical compressive bearing capacity of a pile is defined as a sum of the base (end)
resistance and the shaft (skin) resistance. The characteristic values of the base and shaft
resistances are denoted by ܴ௕,௞ and ܴ௦,௞ . These values are obtained by the specific resistances
‫ݍ‬௕,௞ and ‫ݍ‬௦,௞ . The design value of the total resistance ܴ௖,ௗ is calculated by the expression:
൫ோ್,ೖ /ఊ್ ାோೞ,ೖ /ఊೞ ൯

ܴ௖,ௗ = , (2)
క೔ .ఊ೘೚೏ .ఊ೟
where: ߛ௕ , ߛ௦ , ߦ௜ , ߛ௠௢ௗ , ߛ௧ are factors according to the National Annex of Eurocode 7 of

Bulgaria NA BDS EN 1997-1 [19] and Singapore NA SS EN 1997-1 [20].
¾ MEYERHOF’S METHOD (1976) [16]
This method is based on data ܰௌ௉் from in-situ tests. Meyerhof gives an empirical
relationship between the quantities ‫ݍ‬௕,௞ , ‫ݍ‬௦,௞ ɢܰௌ௉் :
405
௅್
‫ݍ‬௕,௞ = 40. ܰௌ௉் . ൎ 55. ܰௌ௉் , (3)
஽
‫ݍ‬௦,௞ = ݇ ᇱ . ܰௌ௉் , (4)
where: ‫ܮ‬௕ is the pile length; ‫ ܦ‬is the pile diameter; ݇ ᇱ is a correlation coefficient which is
involved in Standards SS EN 1997-1 [20] and BS 8004 2015 [5]. It is accepted ݇Ԣ = 2,5.
For the pile FP71 (ø1500) the value ܴ௖,ௗ = 14255 kN is obtained.
¾ DIN 1054 (2005) [6]
The specific feature of this method is the dependence of the quantities ܴ௕,௞ and ܴ௦,௞ on the
vertical displacement (settlement) s of the pile. The settlement of the pile is limited by
serviceable requirements. Here the limit value of s lim = 25 mm is accepted. Data from CPT
or SPT for non-cohesive soils and the value of undrained shear strength ܿ௨,௞ for cohesive
soils are used for calculation of the specific resistances ‫ݍ‬௕,௞ and ‫ݍ‬௦,௞ . The method in detail is
described in reference (Ilov et al., 2012 [9]).
¾ METHOD OF THE BULGARIAN STANDARD (1993) [3]
The values of the specific base resistance ࢗ࢈,࢑ and specific shaft resistance ࢙ࢗ,࢑ are obtained
using table data. These data are received by empirical methods.
¾ NUMERICAL ANALYSIS IN PLXIS 2D SOFTWARE
A numerical FE analysis is carried out to determine the geotechnical bearing capacity of the
pile FP71. The following assumptions are accepted:
x An axisymmetric FE model of the system “pile-soil body” is created;

x The discretization is done by using triangular 15-nodes finite elements;
x For the soil materials are used two alternative constitutive models: the
linear elastic-perfectly plastic Mohr-Coulomb’s model and the advanced elastic-plastic
Hardening-Soil model;
x The soil-pile contact is modeled by interface elements of thickness closed
to zero. The role of the interfaces is to reduce the friction in contact compared to the friction
in the soil. In Plaxis software the parameter which relates the shear strength of the soil to the
shear strength in the interfaces is R inter . Here the value R inter = 0,67 is assumed;
x The analysis “Prescribe Displacement” is conducted to determine the load
which causes the pile displacement of 25 mm.
406
(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Finite element model of a single pile FP71 in Plaxis 2D software:

(a) Deformed mesh; (b) Vertical displacements
Fig. 6. Curves from FE analysis of the pile FP71: Vertical loading/Vertical displacement
LOADING TEST
Results of a pile ø1500 mm loading test according to Bi-directional method. The test is
conducted at loading equal to three times of service loading. The measured bearing capacity
at the base of the pile has the value of 5787 kN/mଶ .
407
Fig. 7. Loading test curves of pile ø1500 mm
The static loading test according to the Kentledge method gives a vertical displacement of
pile equal to the value of 26 mm at loading equal to 200% of the service loading. The value
of 2700 t = 26 902 kN of the pile bearing capacity is determined from Fig. 7. Involving a
safety factor ߛ௧ = 1,7 according to the Standards NA BDS EN 1997-1 [19] and NA SS EN
1997-1 [20] the value is calculated ܴ௖,ௗ = 15 825 kN.
SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FROM BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSES OF

PILES
The results from bearing capacity analyses are summarized in Table 1.
ɌɚɛɥɢɰɚGeotechnical bearing capacity of piles ࡾࢉ,ࢊ ɜ[‫]ۼܓ‬

ܴ௖,ௗ [kN] of pile with diameter ø [mm]
Method
FP71 ø 1500 FP72 ø 1200 FP39 ø 1500 FP40 ø 1300
Structural capacity 15930 10170 15930 11970
Meyerhof (1976) 14225 9960 14363 12636
DIN - 1054:2005 13899 10509 12932 11245
Bulgarian Standard (1993) 14912 9988 - -
Plaxis Mohr-Coulomb 13521 - - -
Plaxis HS 15091 - - -
Loading Test 15825 - - -
408
NUMERICAL MODELS OF THE FOUNDATION STRURTURE
A 3D model of the FEM was drawn up in a linear-elastic formulation (Fig. 8). The model
includes all the basic elements of the top and foundation structure. The interaction of the
ground-foundation structure is modeled with elastic spring supports (Winkler theory). The
stiffness of each spring changes in depth as a function of the pile size and the physical and
mechanical characteristics of the soil. The spring support strength K i,h is determined by the
formula:
‫ܭ‬௜,௛ = ݇. ‫ݖ‬. ο݄௜ . ݀௥ (5)
where: z is the depth, measured from the level of the terrain;

ο݄௜ - unit segment of the pile/soil layer under consideration;
݀௥ - reduced pile thickness;
k - proportionality coefficient, determined by the tabular method given from authors
Ilov et al. (2012) [9].
Due to the presence of a weak clay layer, a prerequisite for the operation of piles is accepted
in the absence of foundation slab assistance. Modeling of spring supports, taking into account
the actual deformation behavior of the structure, helps to more correctly determine the
internal forces in the structural elements. The ability of a structure to redistribute part of the
load when the foundation is lowered leads to less extremes in the solution and more
economical design.
ETABS software replaces soil body with Winkler’s elastic springs. This simple model of
soil-structure interaction is commonly used in design practice and is discussed in references:
Milev (2013) [17], (2014) [18]; Tsvetanov et al. (2004) [24]. Plaxis software involves a soil
body in FE discretisation and applies apropriate constitutive laws of soil materials. The last
consideration requires the determining of specific material parameters (Kerenchev, 2013-
2014 [11]; Plaxis Manual [21]). Autors Tanev et al. (2012) [22] use Plaxis 3D for modelling
raft-piles-soil interaction.
409
Fig. 8. Model of the building structure in

ETABS software
FP71 FP68
FP72 FP70
Fig. 9. 3D view of the pile group

410
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 10. FE model of the pile group in Plaxis 3D: (a), (b) – Soil body and structure; (c) Settlements
The pile group shown in Fig. 9 with part of the soil body were modeled in Plaxis 3D software
to account for their interaction (Fig. 10). The constitutive model for soil is HS. Foundation
slabs is modeled with Plate elements working for bending and membrane foces. The piles are
modeled with beam elements working for bending moments, shear forces and axial forces.
Table 2 shows the results of the solutions.
Table 2. Maximum bending moments in FP71 pilot

Pile FP71
Software
M x (kNm) M y (kNm)
ETABS 1042 103
PLAXIS 3D 1062 186
CONCLUSIONS
x The design capacity of the pile is the highest, ensuring the structural strength of the cross
section.
x The geotechnical bearing capacity of the pile determined by the loading test is the highest.
x Taking into account the analytical methods, the one of DIN-1054: 2005, which records
the limited pile's displacement, is the most conservative.
x The closest results to the loading test and to the design capacity shows the numerical
solution Plaxis HS.
411
x For the FP71 pile, the Mohr-Coulomb numerical solution shows the most conservative
result.
x The value of the specific base resistance determined by static loading test is close to the
calculated characteristic value ‫ݍ‬௕,௞ = 5500 kPa.
x The accepted characteristic values for the specific shaft resistance ‫ݍ‬௦,௞ are lower than
those, obtained for static loadong test.
x The 3D solution in the ETABS software of the "top structure-foundation system” for a
linear-elastic concrete model and a Winkler's subgrade model gives values of bending
moments in the FP71 pile similar to those of the 3D solution in the Plaxis software of the
"pilot group-subgrade" for a linear-elastic concrete model and a HS model. A more
precise and complete analysis of the results of the building design solutions needs to be
carried out.
REFERENCES
[1] BDS EN 1992-1-1 (2007), Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and
rules for buildings.
[2] BDS EN 1997-1 (2007), Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design, Part 1: General rules.
[3] BDS (1993), Bulgarian standards for pile foundation design, Issue 6.
[4] Bond, A., Harris, H., (2008). Decoding Eurocode 7, Taylor&Fransis, London.
[5] BS 8004 (2015). Code of practice for foundations. ©The British Standard Institution.
[6] Dikov, D., Tocev, A., Ilov, G., (2010b). Study on the options for foundation structure of a “Hotel
and Office Complex”, Sofia Airoport area II. Foundation part. Annual of the University of
Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Fascicule IV, Sofia.
[7] [6] DIN 1054 (2005), Baugrund. Sicherheitsnachweise im Erd- und Grundbau.
[8] Ilov, G., Tocev, A., Dikov, D., (2010a). Study on the options for foundation structure of a “Hotel
and Office Complex”, Sofia Airoport area II. Soil Mechanics part. Annual of the University of
Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Fascicule IV, Sofia.
[9] Ilov, G., et al. (2012), Guide to Geotechnics according to Requirements of Eurocode 7.
Geotechnical Design, KIIP, Sofia, ISBN: 978-954-92275-8-1.
[10] Frank, R. et al. (2004), Designers’ Guide to EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7: Geotechincal design –
General Rules, Thomas Telford Publishing, ISBN: 0 7277 3154 8.
[11] Kerenchev, N., (2013-2014). Developing an experimental laboratory setting for determining soil
parameters related to deformation, Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering
and Geodesy, Vol. XLVI, Sofia.
[12] Kerenchev, N., Markov, I., (2016). Determining the axial bearing capacity of pile based on
common methods and comparison with pile load test. Proc. Of the 3th Int. conf.
VIETGEO2016, Hanoi.
[13] Kostova, St., (2011). Principles for determining of the soil ground bearing capacity according to
Eurocode 7. Academic journal Mechanics, Transport, Communications, Issue 2, No./ Aricle ID:
00494, http://www.mtc-aj.com.
[14] Kostova, St., (2011). Designing methods of the soil bearing capacity according to Eurocode 7
and Bulgarian norms, Academic journal Mechanics, Transport, Communications, Issue 3, No.
Aricle ID: 00550, http://www.mtc-aj.com.
412
[15] Kostova, St., (2018). Analysis of the procedure for calculation of the soil ground bearing
capacity according to Eurocode 7, Academic journal Mechanics, Transport, Communications,
Vol. 16, No. 1.
[16] Meyerhof. G. G., (1976). Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations, J. of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, vol. 102, Iss. GT3.
[17] Milev, N., (2013). A Simplified Soil-Single Footing Interaction Based on Winkler Foundation
Model. International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering (ICEGE 2013),
Istanbul.
[18] Milev, N., (2014). Approaches for Consideration of the Soil-Foundation-Structure Interaction.
Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Fascicule IV,
Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. XLVI, Sofia.
[19] NA BDS EN 1997-1 (2012), Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design, Part 1: General rules.
[20] NA SS EN 1997-1 (2014), Singapore National Annex to Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design, Part
1: General rules.
[21] Plaxis Material Models Manual, (2015).
[22] Tanev, T., Kerenchev, N., Manolov, A., Dimitrov, H., (2012). Analyzing the displacements of a
pile frame to determine its transverse load-bearing capacity. Proc. of the 22-nd European Young
Geotechnical Engineering Conference, EYGEC2012.
[23] Tomlinson, M., J. (1994), Pile design and Construction practice. E&FN Spon, an imprint of
Chapman&Hall, ISBN: 0 203 47457 0.
[24] Tsvetanov, T., Mihov, Y., Mihova, L., (2003-2004). Structural analysis and calculation model of
multi-storey RC building. Annual of the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and
Geodesy, Fascicule IV, Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. XLI, Sofia.
[25] Waterma, D. (2006), Structural elements in Plaxis. CG1, Chile.
413
Struþni rad
UDK 624.745.12(497.113)
PIPE ROOFING TEHNOLOGIJA GRADNJE NA

PRIMERU PODVOŽNJAKA ISPOD
752.2/26(ý1(358*(865(06.2-
MITROVICI
$OHNVDQGUD.LNRYLü, 9HVQD/D]DUHYLü0LORUDG,YHWLü
Miloš HraQLVDYOMHYLü
Novkol, 6XUþLQVNL put 1k, Beograd, aleksandra@novkol.co.rs
REZIME
,]JUDGQMDLQIUDVWUXNWXUQLKREMHNDWDVDGHQLYHOLVDQLPXNUãWDQMHPVDåHOH]QLþNLPLGUXPVNLP
VDREUDüDMHP þHVWRVHVXVUHüe sa zahtevima da se prilikom realizacije projekta ne vrši nikakva
REXVWDYD SRVWRMHüHJ VDREUDüDMD 2YDNYD RJUDQLþHQMD uslovljavaju SULPHQX VSHFLILþQRJ
QDþLQD L]YRÿHQMD UDGRYD 1D NRQNUHWQRP SULPHUX SULND]DüH VH SULPHQD “pipe roofing”
tehnologije VDDNWXHOQR]DYUãHQRJSURMHNWDQDL]JUDGQMLSRGYRåQMDNDNUR]QDVLSWURNRORVHþQH
pruge, kao i razlo]L]ERJNRMLKVHRYRUHãHQMHXGDWRPVOXþDMXpokazalo kao najopravdanije.
./-8ý1(5(ý,pipe roofing, izgradnja, podvožnjak
PIPE ROOFING TECHNOLOGY WITH

CONSTRUCTION EXAMPLE ON THE UNDERPASS
UNDER THE THREE-TRACK RAILWAY IN
SREMSKA MITROVICA
ABSTRACT
Construction of infrastructural facilities with leveled crossing with railway and road traffic is
often met with the requirement that during the construction no suspension of existing traffic
is required. Such restrictions cause the application of a specific method of work. The exact
example will show the application of the “pipe roofing” technology from the currently
completed project on the construction of underpass through the embankment of the three-
track railway, as well as the reasons why this solution proved to be the most justified in this
case.
KEY WORDS: pipe roofing, construction, underpass
UVOD
3ULOLNRP L]JUDGQMH LQVIUDVWUXNWXUQLK REMHNDWD NDR ãWR VX VDREUDüDMQL WXQHOL NDQDOL]DFLRQL
NROHNWRULFHYRYRGLLVOLþQRMDYOMDMXVHVSHFLILþQLVOXþDMHYLNDGDVHWDNYLREMHNWLXNUãWDMXVD
414
YDåQLPVDREUDüDMQLFDPDXGUXPVNRPåHOH]QLþNRPLOLþDNLDYLRVDREUDüDMX.DNRVHVYDNL
SUHNLG RGYLMDQMD VDREUDüDMD RGUDåDYD QD VPDQMHQMH EU]LQH L IUHNYHQFLMH, a u pojedinim
VOXþDMHYLPDSRVOHGLFHPRJXELWLLYHRPDVNXSHþHVWRVH]DKWHYDGDVHSULOLNRPUHDOL]DFLMH
QRYRJ SURMHNWD QHVPHWDQR RGYLMD SRVWRMHüL VDREUDüDM EH] SURPHQH X SUDYFX -HGQD RG
PHWRGDJUDGQMHNRMD]DGRYROMDYDQDSUHGQDYHGHQDRJUDQLþHQMDMH³Sipe roofing”. Kako je
PHWRGDNRPSOHNVQDLVNXSDQMHQDSULPHQDMHRSUDYGDQDVDPRXRGUHÿHQLPVLWXDFLMDPD
PIPE ROOFING TEHNOLOGIJA
0HWRGD ³SLSH URRILQJ´ VH ]DVQLYD QD XWLVNLYDQMX þHOLþQLK FHYL SR RERGX SURILOD EXGXüHJ
objekta u njegovoj celokupnoj dužini. 3ULNDVQLMHPLVNRSXXJUDÿHQHFHYLVOXåHNDRWXQHOVND
SRGJUDGD8WLVNLYDQMHþHOLþQLKFHYLNDRLVDPDPHWRGDMHSURL]DãODL]PODGHJUDQHL]YRÿHQMD
XUEDQHLQIUDVWUXNWXUHSRLPHQX³WUHQFKOHVV´þLMDMHRGOLNDGDVHVYLUDGRYLL]YRGHEH]NRSDQMD
u otvorenoPURYX8WLVNLYDQMHVHYUãLSQHXPDWVNLPþHNLüHPVDYHOLNLPEURMHPXGDUDFDX
MHGLQLFLYUHPHQD3ULOLNRPXWLVNLYDQMD]HPOMDXQXWDUFHYLVHQHYDGLYHüRVWDMHXQMRM
Slika 1. Metoda “pipe roofing”

Figure 1. “Pipe roofing” method
U daljem tekstu SULND]DüHVHDNWXHOQR]DYUãHQLSURMHNDWQDL]JUDGQMLSRGYRåQMDNDNUR]QDVLS

WURNRORVHþQH SUXJH X 6UHPVNRM 0LWURYLFL 3URMHNDW MH L]UDGLR 6DREUDüDMQL LQVWLWXW &,3 D
radove po njemu izvodila beogradska firma Novkol. 5DGRYL VX ]DSRþHWL SRþHWNRP
godine.
OPŠTI PODACI O PROJEKTU PODVOŽNJAKA
8VNODGXVD]DKWHYLPDXSURMHNWQRP]DGDWNXSURMHNDWMHREXKYDWDRL]PHãWDQMHSRVWRMHüHJ
SXWQRJ SUHOD]D X QLYRX SUHNR WUL NRORVHND L SUHXVPHUDYDQMH GUXPVNRJ VDREUDüDMD QD
novoprojektovani podvožnjak. Ukrštaj je u naseOMHQRPSULJUDGVNRPSRGUXþMX)UXãNRJRUVNH
415
XOLFHXEOL]LQLåHOH]QLþNHVWDQLFHX6UHPVNRM0LWURYLFL5DQJVDREUDüDMQLFHGHILQLVDQHNDR
gradska odredio je širinu kolovoza od 6,5m sa obostrano servisnim stazama od po 0,75m.
3UHGYLÿHQHVXLRERVWUDQHSHãDþko-biFLNOLVWLþNHVWD]HXãLULQLRGP.
Slika 2. Podvožnjak-SRSUHþQLSUHVHN
Figure 2. Underpass – cross section
3UL SURMHNWRYDQMX GHQLYHOLVDQRJ XNUãWDMD ]DGUåDOH VX VH L SRVWRMHüH RVRYLQH L QLYHOHWH
koloseka. Prema zahtevu Železnica Srbije tražilo se UHãHQMHSRGYRåQMDNDþLMDUHDOL]DFLMDQH
]DKWHYDQLNDNYXREXVWDYXåHOH]QLþNRJVDREUDüDMDQLSRMHGQRPNRORVHNX
2YR RJUDQLþHQMH XVORYLOR MH VSHFLILþDQ QDþLQ L]YRÿHQMD UDGRYD 7HKQRORJLMD L]YRÿHQMD
SRGYRåQMDND SRG VDREUDüDMHP ]DKWHYD GD NRQVWUXNFLMD SRGYRåQjaka ne može da bude u
QLYHOHWL NRORVHND YHü LVSRG QLYHOHWH VD Qadslojem zemljanog materijala. Iz tog razloga
SURMHNWRP MH SUHGYLÿHQ SUROD] SRGYRåQMDND LVSRG SUXJH PHWRGRP þHOLþQLK FHYL NDR
podgradnog sistema u dužini od 18m.
*(2/2â.$*5$Ĉ$7(5(1$
Na oVQRYX SUHWKRGQR L]YHGHQLK LVWUDåQLK UDGRYD XVWDQRYOMHQR MH GD MH WHUHQ L]JUDÿHQ RG
materijala koji predstavljaju jezersko-lesoidne sedimente, odnosno od glinovite prašine
416
OHVRLGQRJ SRUHNOD 2E]LURP GD MH SURVWRU XUEDQL]RYDQ X SRYUãLQVNRP GHOX XWYUÿHQ MH
tehnogeni-nasuti materijal.
Slika 3. Geološki presek

Figure 3. Geological section
Prilikom istražnog bušenja u ovoj glinovitoj prašini je registrovana pojava pozemne vode.
1LYR SRG]HPQH YRGH L]PHUHQ MH QD GXELQL YHü RG P RG SRYUãLQH WHUHQD L to u zoni
SRGYRåQMDND =ERJ SULVXVWYD SRG]HPQLK YRGD SUHGYLÿHQD VX drenažna bunara. Uloga
drenažnih bunara je privremenog karaktera, tj. samo u fazi izgradnje.
'(7$/-1,23,67(+12/2*,-(,=92Ĉ(1-$1$32'92ä1-$.8
Tehnologija izgradnje se sadrži od slHGHüLKID]D

- sniženje nivoa podzemnih voda sa iskopom,
- XWLVNLYDQMHþHOLþQLKFHYLSRRERGXEXGXüHJSRGYRåQMDND
- LVNRSSRG]DãWLWRPþHOLþQLKFHYLVDSRGJUDÿLYDQMHPLEHWRQLUDQMHPSRGYRåQMDND
=DXWLVNLYDQMHMHXVYRMHQSUHþQLNþHOLþQLKFHYLPPVDGHEOMLQom zida 10mm. Pošto su

FHYLGXåLQHPXNXSQDGXåLQDRGPVHSRVWLåHQDWDMQDþLQãWRVHSUYRXWLVQHMHGQDFHY
SRVWDYLGUXJDLþHRQR]DYDUL]DXWLVQXWXSD]DWLPXWLVQHLGUXJDFHY3UHGYLÿHQRMe da utisnute
FHYLPHÿXVREQREXGXSRYH]DQHL]UD]ORJDGDSUYDXWLVQXWDFHYEXGHYRÿLFDVYDNRMVOHGHüRM
FHYL NDR L GD X ID]L LVNRSD QH GRÿH GR SURSDGDQMD WOD L]PHÿX FHYL Za povezivanje cevi
NRULVWHVHVSHFLMDOQRREOLNRYDQLþHOLþQLSURILOL]DYDUHQL]DFHYSUHXWLVNLYDQMD
Najpre se vrši utiskivanje srHGLãQHþHOLþQHFHYLJRUQMHJVYRGD1DNRQWRJDVHYUãLXWLVNLYDQMH
VXVHGQLKFHYLQDL]PHQLþQRVDREHVWUDQHGR]DYUãHWNDJRUQMHJVYRGDD]DWLPVHXWLVNXMX
cevi ERþQLK ]LGRYD ãWLWD 7RNRP FHORJ SURFHVD REH]EHÿHQD MH RGJRYDUDMXüD JHRGHWVND
kontrola pravca i ugla utiskivanja svake cevi.
417
Slika 4. Izgled portalnog rama

Figure 4. Portal frame
1DRVQRYXVWDWLþNRJSURUDþXQDGRELMHQRMHGDVHLVNRSSRG]DãWLWRPþHOLþQLKFHYLPRåHYUãLWL
X NDPSDGDPD RG SR P 1DMSUH VH YUãL SRGJUDÿLYDQMH NUDMHYD XWLVQXWLK FHYL po celom
RELPXãWRSRGUD]XPHYDL]YRÿHQMHGRQMHEHWRQVNHSORþHLþHOLþQHSRGJUDGHNRMDVHRslanja
QDQMX1DRYDMQDþLQNUDMHYLFHYLVHSRFHORPRELPXILNVLUDMXRGQRVQRYUãLVHIRUPLUDQMH
SRUWDOQRJUDPDNDRSUHGXVORY]DSRþHWDNUDGRYDQDLVNRSXXQXWDUãWita od cevi.
1DNRQ]DYUãHWNDSUYHID]HLVNRSDYUãLVHSRGJUDÿLYDQMHFHYLãWRSRGUD]XPHYDVOLþQRNDRL
]DSRUWDOQLUDPL]YRÿHQHWMQDVWDYOMDQMHGRQMHEHWRQVNHSORþHSRGYRåQMDNDLSRVWDYOMDQMH
þHOLþQHSRGJUDGHQDRVRYLQVNRPUDVWRMDQMXRG/ P
Slika 5. Završetak iskopa unutar tunela

Figure 5. Completion of excavation within the tunnel
'DOMLQDVWDYDNUDGRYDQDLVNRSXLSRGJUDÿLYDQMXVHRGYLMDVXNFHVLYQRQDLVWLQDþLQNDR]D,
ID]X =DGQMD ID]D LVNRSD L SRGJUDÿLYDQMD SUHGVWDYOMD SRWSXQR otvaranje prolaza ispod,
RGQRVQRXQXWDUãWLWDNDRL]DYUãHWDNEHWRQLUDQMDGRQMHSORþHObzirom da je profil tunela
418
JDEDULWDFFD[PLVNRS]HPOMDQRJPDWHULMDODPRJDRMHELWLYUãHQPDãLQVNLX]NRULãüHQMH
adekvatne mehanizacije.
,]YRÿHQMH]LGRYDVWXERYDSHãDþNHLJRUQMHSORþHVHYUãLXFHORVWLEHWRQLUDQMHPQDOLFXPHVWD
X NDPSDGDPD RG P SUL þHPX VH HOHPHQWL þHOLþQH SRGJUDGH NUDMQML VWXERYL L JUHGD QH
skidaju pre betoniranja. Oni ostaju ubetonirani kao sastavni deo završne konstrukcije, dok se
kosniFLLFHQWUDOQLVWXEVHNXLXNODQMDMXSUHSRVWDYOMDQMDXQXWUDãQMHRSODWHýHOLþQHFHYLRVWDMX
X]HPOMLLGRQHNOHLPDMXXORJXXREH]EHÿHQMXYRGRQHSURSXVQRVWL 3RVHEQDSDåQMDSRVYHüHQD
MHQDVWDYFLPDEHWRQLUDQMDUDGQLPLGRGLUQLPVSRMQLFDPDNDNRGRQMHSORþH tako i zidova i
JRUQMHSORþH2E]LURPGDMHWHKQRORJLMDWDNYDGDRQHPRJXüDYDL]UDGXVSROMQHKLGURL]RODFLMH
]DãWLWD ]LGRYD L JRUQMH SORþH YUãLOD VH KLGURL]RODFLRQLP SUHPD]RP VD XQXWUDãQMH VWUDQH
Izvedeno stanje podvožnjaka prikazano je na slici 6.
Slika 6. Podvožnjak – finalno stanje

Figure 6. Underpass – final
=$./-8ý$.
Izgradnja objekata “pipe roofing” tehnologijom u svetskim razmerama nije novost, ali u
Srbiji još uvek jeste. 2YRMHVDPRMHGDQXQL]XSULPHUDJGHJUDÿHYLQVNDRSHUDWLYDprimenom
savremenih tehnika i tehnologija zadovoljava i najoštrije zahteve pri gradnji kompleksnih
LQIUDVWUXNWXUQLKSURMHNDWD9HUXMHPRGDüHLXEXGXüHSULND]LYDQMHVOLþQLKSURMHNDWDELWLVYH
više i više.
LITERATURA:
$UKLYDSUHGX]HüDÄ1RYNRO³
6DREUDüDMQLLQVWLWXW&,3GRR.: Denivelisani ukrštaj magistralne pruge Beograd-Šid-državna granica i
lokalnog puta u Ulici fruškogorska u Sremskoj Mitrovici-Podvožnjak na katastarskoj parceli
roj 6003/1, 5940/1 i 5953, KO Sremska Mitrovica. Beograd 2015.
419
UDK 624.155
ɉɊɈɊȺɑɍɇ ɇɈɋɂȼɈɋɌɂ ɂɇȳȿɄɐɂɈɇɂɏ

ɆɂɄɊɈ-ɒɂɉɈȼȺ ɄɊɈɁ ɆɈȾȿɅɈȼȺȵȿ
ȿɎȿɄɌȺɂɇɋɌȺɅȺɐɂȳȿ ɉɊȿɆȺ ɌȿɈɊɂȳɂ
ȿɄɋɉȺɇɁɂɈɇȿ ɉɊȺɁɇɂɇȿ
Ⱦɨɧɟɇɢɤɨɥɨɜɫɤɢ*, ȳɨɜɚɧȻɪɉɚɩɢʄ**
* Ƚɟɨɢɧɝ, ɛɭɥɆɢɬɪɨɩɨɥɢɬ Ɍɟɨɞɨɫɢʁ Ƚɨɥɨɝɚɧɨɜ 147/III-5, ɋɤɨɩʂɟ,
Ɋ ɋɟɜ Ɇɚɤɟɞɨɧɢʁɚ done.nikolovski@gmail.com
** Ƚɪɚɻɟɜɢɧɫɤɢɮɚɤɭɥɬɟɬɛɭɥɉɚɪɬɢɡɚɧɫɤɢɨɞɪɟɞɢɛɪɋɤɨɩʂɟ
Ɋ ɋɟɜ Ɇɚɤɟɞɨɧɢʁɚ, papic@gf.ukim.edu.mk
ɊȿɁɂɆE
Ⱦɭɛɨɤɨ ɬɟɦɟʂɟʃɟ ɧɚ ɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ ɤɚɨ ɦɟɬɨɞɫɟ ɤɨɪɢɫɬɢɥo ʁɨɲ ɭ ɞɚɥɟɤɨʁɩɪɨɲɥɨɫɬɢ, ɫ
ɰɢʂɟɦ ɞɚɫɟɭ ɩɢɬɚʃɟɧɟɞɨɜɟɞɟ ɭɩɨɬɪɟɛʂɢɜɨɫɬɨɛʁɟɤɚɬɚ. Ɇɟɻɭɧɨɜɢʁɢɦɜɚɪɢʁɚɧɬɚɦɚʁɟ
ɢ ʁɟɞɚɧ ɢɧɨɜɚɬɢɜɚɧ ɧɚɱɢɧ – ɧɚ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɦ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚ Ɂɚɯɜɚʂɭʁɭʄɢ ɫɜɨʁɢɦ
ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɚɦɚ, ɢɫɬɢɧɭɞɢɛɪɨʁɧɟɩɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɚɥɢɢɛɭɞɢ ɢɧɬɟɪɟɫ ɭ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚɱɤɨʁ
ɮɟɥɢ ɢɡ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɤɟ ɡɛɨɝ ɢɡɚɡɨɜɚ ɫɚ ɬɟɨɪɢʁɫɤɢɦ ɢ ɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɢɦɦɨɞɟɥɢɪɚʃɟɦ. ɍ ɪɚɞɭ
ɛɢʄɟ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧ ɩɨɫɬɭɩɚɤ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚʃɚ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɭɥɬɢɦɚɬɢɜɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɩɭɬɟɦ
ɫɢɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɟɮɟɤɬɚɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɩɨɦɨʄɭ ɦɟɬɨɞɚɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ.
ɄȴɍɑɇȿɊȿɑɂ: ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɨɜɢ, ɦɨɞɟɥɢɪɚʃɟ, ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɚɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɚ
CALCULATION OF THE BEARING CAPACITY OF

INJECTION MICRO-PILES BY MODELING OF THE
EFFECT OF THE INSTALATION THROUGH THE
CAVITY EXPANSION THEORY
ABSTRACT
Deep foundation on piles, as a method has been used since ancient times, with main purpose
to satisfy the serviceability of the structures. There are many types, among which is also one
innovative method on injection micro-piles. Due to its characteristics, it offers many
advantages, as well as it has arouse high interest in the research in the field of geotechnics
due to challenges with theoretical and numerical modeling. Thereby, it will be defined a new
methodology of calculation of the ultimate bearing capacity of these piles, by simulation the
effect of installation through the theory of cavity expansion.
KEY WORDS: injection micro-piles, modeling, cavity expansion

420
ɍȼɈȾ
ɉɪɟɩɨɡɧɚɬʂɢɜɨɫɬ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɭ ɨɞɧɨɫɭ ɧɚɬɡɜɤɨɧɜɟɧɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɟ ɬɢɩɨɜɟ

ɞɭɛɨɤɨɝ ɬɟɦɟʂɟʃɚ, ʁɟ ɫɚɚɫɩɟɤɬɚ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɟ ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ. ɇɚɢɦɟ, ɨɧɢ ɫɟɢɡɜɨɞɟ ɩɭɬɟɦ
ɬɡɜ ɤɨɦɩɥɟɬɧɨɝ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚ ɱɟɥɢɱɧɟ ɰɟɜɢ ɞɨ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɟ ɞɭɛɢɧɟ, ɛɟɡ ɜɚɻɟʃɚ
ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɬɥɚ, ɧɚɤɨɧɱɟɝɚɫɟɜɪɲɢ ɢɧʁɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɟɫɦɟɲɟ ɩɨɞɜɢɫɨɤɢɦ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦ. Ɍɢɦɟ
ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɞɢɪɚ ɭ ɨɤɨɥɧɭ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɭ, ɱɢɦɟ ɫɟ ɮɨɪɦɢɪɚ ɝɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɫɤɚ
ɮɨɪɦɚɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ. Ɉɜɚɤɨ ɨɮɨɪɦʂɟɧɚɦɟɲɚɜɢɧɚɬɥɚ ɢɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɫɦɟɲɟɡɚʁɟɞɧɨɫɚ
ɱɟɥɢɱɧɨɦ ɰɟɜɢ ɮɨɪɦɢɪɚ ɬɡɜ. "mixed-in-place ɬɢɩ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ. ɉɨɛɢʁɚʃɟɦ ɱɟɥɢɱɧɟ
ɰɟɜɢ ɭ ɦɟɞɢʁɭɦ ɬɥɚ ɛɟɡ ɜɚɻɟʃɚ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ ɚ ɤɚɫɧɢʁɟ ɢ ɭɛɪɢɡɝɚɜɚʃɟɦ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ
ɫɦɟɲɟ ɩɨɞ ɜɢɫɨɤɢɦ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦ ɜɪɲɢ ɫɟ ɢ ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɟ ɢ ɡɛɢʁɚʃɟ ɨɤɨɥɧɟ ɡɚɩɪɟɦɢɧɟ
ɡɟɦʂɚɧɨɝ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ, ɱɢɦɟ ɫɟɞɨɛɢʁɚɜɟɨɦɚ ɡɛɢʁɟɧɚɫɪɟɞɢɧɚ ɢɨɞɥɢɱɧɚɪɚɞɧɚɨɤɨɥɢɧɚ
ɲɢɩɨɜɚ, ɲɬɨɪɟɡɭɥɬɭʁɟ ɢɡɭɡɟɬɧɨɜɟɥɢɤɢɦ ɪɚɞɧɢɦ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɦɚ.
ɋɥɢɤɚ 1. ɉɪɢɤɚɡɱɟɥɢɱɧɟ ɰɟɜɢ ɡɚɛɭɲɟʃɟɫɚ ɫɜɪɞɥɨɦ ɢɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɬɢɩHekPile

Figure 1. Preview of drilling steel tube with crown and injection micro-pile type HekPile
Ɉɬɭɞɚ, ɦɨɠɟɫɟɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢ ɤɚɤɨ ɦɨɞɟɥɨɜɚʃɟɢɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɨɜɢɯ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ

ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɚ ʃɢɯɨɜɨɝ ɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɚ ɧɟ ɦɨɠɟ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟ ɚɤɨ ɫɟ ɭ
ɨɛɡɢɪ ɧɟ ɭɡɦɟ ɟɮɟɤɚɬ ʃɢɯɨɜɟ ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ. ɋɬɨɝɚ, ɮɨɤɭɫ ɪɚɞɚ ʁɟ ɫɢɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɚ ɟɮɟɤɬɚ
ɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɢ ɩɨɜɟʄɚʃɚ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ ɭ ɡɨɧɚɦɚ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɚ ɢ ɢɫɩɨɞ ɛɚɡɟ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɟ ɩɨʁɚɜʂɭʁɭ
ɬɨɤɨɦ ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ. Ȼɢʄɟɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɟɧ ʁɟɞɚɧ ɨɫɧɨɜɧɢ ɦɨɞɟɥɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɧɨɜɢɯ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚ
ɧɚɤɨɧ ɢɧʁɟɤɬɢɪɚʃɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɚ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɭɥɬɢɦɚɬɢɜɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɞɚ ɛɢ ɫɟ
ɡɚɬɢɦɢɡɜɪɲɢɥɨ ɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɟ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɚ ɢɡ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɨɝ ɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɨɝ ɦɟɬɨɞɚ (ɆɄȿ)ɤɚɤɨ
ɢɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɚ ɦɟɪɟʃɚɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ.
ɌȿɈɊɂȳȺȿɄɋɉȺɇɁɂɈɇȿɉɊȺɁɇɂɇȿ
Ɍɟɨɪɢʁɚ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ (QJ &DYLW\ H[SDQVLRQ ɧɚɥɚɡɢ ɲɢɪɨɤɭ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɭ ɭ

ɢɧɞɭɫɬɪɢʁɢ ɦɟɬɚɥɚ, ɚɥɢ ɨɞ . ɝɨɞ. ɱɟɫɬɨ ɫɟ ɤɨɪɢɫɬɢ ɢ ɤɨɞ ɚɩɥɢɤɚɰɢʁɟ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɚ
ɩɨɜɟɡɚɧɢɯ ɫɚ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɤɨɦ. Ƚɟɧɟɪɚɥɧɚɞɟɮɢɧɢɰɢʁɚ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɚ ʁɟɞɚɩɨɫɬɨʁɢɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɚɫɚ
ɢɧɢɰɢʁɚɥɧɢɦ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫɨɦ a0 ɧɚɤɨʁɭ ɭɬɢɱɟ ɢɧɢɰɢʁɚɥɧɢ in-situ ɟɮɟɤɬɢɜɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɢɡɬɥɚ
p0. ɉɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ ɭ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɢ p ɩɨɫɬɟɩɟɧɨɪɚɫɬɟɩɪɢɱɟɦɭ ɰɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɚɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɚɞɨɛɢʁɚ
ɧɨɜɟ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɟ ɢɥɢɧɨɜɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫa. Ɍɟɨɪɢʁɚɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ ʁɟɩɨɞɟʂɟɧɚɧɚɞɜɚ
ɞɟɥɚ: ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɢ ɰɢɥɢɧɞɚɪ ɢɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɚ ɫɮɟɪɚ.
421
ɋɥɢɤɚ 2. Ɇɨɞɟɥɰɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ ɫɚ ɝɥɚɜɧɢɦ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɬɢɦɚ (Yu&Houlsby)

Figure 2. Model of cylindrical expansion with its main elements (Yu&Houlsby)
Ɍɥɨ ʁɟ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɨ ɤɚɨ ɯɨɦɨɝɟɧ ɢɡɨɬɪɨɩɚɧ, ɞɢɥɚɬɚɧɬɚɧ, ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɚɧ ɢ ɢɞɟɚɥɧɨ

ɩɥɚɫɬɢɱɚɧɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ ɥɨɦ ʁɟɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɟɧMohr-Coulomb-ɨɜɢɦ ɤɪɢɬɟɪɢʁɭɦɨɦ ɥɨɦɚ.
Ʉɨɧɜɟɧɰɢʁɚɡɚɧɨɬɚɰɢʁɭ ʁɟɬɚɤɜɚɞɚɫɭ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚɧɚɡɚɬɟɡɚʃɟ ɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɚ ɫɚ ɩɨɡɢɬɢɜɧɢɦ
ɩɪɟɞɡɧɚɤɨɦ, ɩɚɬɚɤɨʁɟɞɧɚɱɢɧɚɩɨɩɪɢɦɚɫɥɟɞɟʄɢɨɛɥɢɤ:
ߙߪ௞ െ ߪ௜ = ܻ (1)
Ɂɚ ɩɨɫɬɨʁɟʄɟ ɫɬɚʃɟ ɬɨɬɚɥɧɨ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɟ ɦɨɪɚ ɞɚ ɛɭɞɟ ɭ ɪɚɜɧɨɬɟɠɢ ɫɚ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɢɦ
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɢɦ ɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚ, ɞɚɬɢɦ ɪɟɥɚɰɢʁɚɦɚ ɢɊɟɥɚɰɢʁɚɡɚɪɚɞɢʁɚɥɧɨɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɟɭ
ɡɚɬɜɨɪɟɧɨɦɨɛɥɢɤɭ, ɛɢʄɟɢɡɪɠɟɧɚɤɚɨ:
௥ డఙ
ೝ
ߪᖫ = ߪ௥ + (2)
௠ డ௥
ߪ௥ (ܽ) = െ‫݌‬ (3)
lim ߪ௥ = െ‫݌‬଴ (4)
௥ืஶ
ɉɨɦɨʄɭ ɬɟɨɪɢʁɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ, ɩɨɪɟɞ ɧɨɜɨɧɚɫɬɚɧɚɥɨɝɫɬɚʃɚ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚɦɨɝɭ

ɞɚ ɫɟ ɨɞɪɟɞɟ ɢ ɧɨɜɟ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɟ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɚ ɭ ɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɢ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ ɧɚ
ɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɢɦ ɞɭɛɢɧɚɦɚ ɂɧɢɰɢʁɚɥɧɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɚɧ ɡɚ ɪɚɡɜɢʁɚʃɟ ɰɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɟ
ɛɨɱɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ ʁɟ ɭ ɫɬɜɚɪɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɱɟɥɢɱɧɨɝ ɫɜɪɞɥɚ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɟ ɧɚɞɨɞɚʁɟ ɰɟɜɢɦɚ
(a0x=0.075 cm), ɞɨɤʁɟ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚ ɭ ɞɪɭɝɨɦ ɩɪɚɜɰɭ, ɭ ɛɚɡɢ ɲɢɩɚɜɢɫɢɧɚɲɢʂɤɚ ɫɜɪɞɥɚ
ɤɨʁɢɦ ɫɟɜɪɲɢɛɭɲɟʃɟ, ɧɟɨɩɯɨɞɧɚɡɚɪɚɡɜɢʁɚʃɟɫɮɟɪɢɱɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ (a0y=0.075 cm). Ɂɚ
ɚɩɥɢɤɚɰɢʁɭ ɦɟɬɨɞɚ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ, ɩɪɢ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɢ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɧɚɜɟɫɬɢ
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɟɭɫɥɨɜɟ ɭɤɨʁɢɦɚʄɟɨɧɛɢɬɢɜɚɥɢɞɚɧ. ɇɚɢɦɟ, ɩɨɪɚɫɬɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ p ɧɟʄɟ ɦɨʄɢ ɞɚ
ɩɪɟɦɚɲɢ ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɟ p ɤɨʁɚ ʁɟ ɨɝɪɚɧɢɱɟɧɚ ɚɧɜɟɥɨɩɨɦ ɥɨɦɚ
ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɲɬɨɭɫɬɜɚɪɢɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ ɝɨɪʃɭ ɝɪɚɧɢɰɭ. ɋ ɞɪɭɝɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ, ɚɤɨʁɟ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ
ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ ɢɫɩɨɞ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɩɚɫɢɜɧɨɝ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ ɧɚ ɪɚɡɝɥɟɞɚɧɨʁ ɞɭɛɢɧɢ ɞɨ ɮɨɪɫɢɪɚɧɟ
ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟɭɨɩɲɬɟɧɟʄɟɧɢɞɨʄɢ (pppืU=0,0 cm). ɍ ɧɚɫɬɚɜɤɭ ʄɟɛɢɬɢ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢ
ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɢɡɚɫɬɚʃɟ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚɧɚɧɟɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɪɚɡɝɥɟɞɚɧɢɯ ɞɭɛɢɧɚ.
422
ɋɮɟɪɢɱɧɚɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɚɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɢ ɨɞ m
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɢ ɭɫɥɨɜ: p kPa>pp=747,1 kPa
ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ: p=p kPa
ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɭ ɛɚɡɢ: a=0,165 m, U=a-a0=0,090 m
ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɟɥɚɫɬɨ-ɩɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɟ ɡɨɧɟ: b=0,801 m
ɐɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɚɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɚɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɢ ɨɞ m
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɢ ɭɫɥɨɜ: p 747,4 kPa>pp=670,2 kPa
ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ: p=0,95*p 710 kPa
ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚ m: a=0,188 m, U=a-a0=0,113 m
ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬK: K=Ȉ)ırȈ)ız=453,1/216,8=2,09
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ 1ɉɪɨɦɟɧɚɪɚɞɢʁɭɫɚɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɚ ɞɨp=710 kPa ɢɫɬɚʃɟ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ

Table 1. Change of the radius of micro-pile a up to p=710 kPa and state of stresses
r-r0/ro ır ıѭ ız a-a0/a0 p R a U b
(/) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (/) (kPa) (/) (m) (m) (m)
0.00 -710.0 -192.4 -328.4 0.00 150 1.162 0.075 0.000 0.093
1.13 -409.3 -110.9 -189.3 0.02 250 1.937 0.077 0.002 0.190
3.26 -246.9 -66.9 -114.2 0.06 350 2.712 0.080 0.005 0.314
14.97 -101.8 -62.2 -82.0 1.49 710 5.502 0.188 0.113 1.949
29.44 -87.5 -76.5 -82.0 4.54 750 5.812 0.418 0.343 4.673
ɐɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɚɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɚɧɚɞɭɛɢɧɢ ɨɞ m
ɝɪɚɧɢɱɧɢ ɭɫɥɨɜ: p 684,4 kPa>pp=594,6 kPa
ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ: p=0,90*p 616 kPa
ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɧɚm: a=0,145 m, U=a-a0=0,07 m
ɤɨɟɮɢɰɢɟɧɬK: K=Ȉ)ırȈ)ız=304,2/144,6=2,10
423
Tabela 2. ɉɪɨɦɟɧɚɪɚɞɢʁɭɫɚɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɚ ɞɨp=616 kPa ɢɫɬɚʃɟɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ

Table 2. Change of the radius of micro-pile a up to p=616 kPa and state of stresses
r-r0/ro ır ıѭ ız a-a0/a0 p R a U b
(/) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (/) (kPa) (/) (m) (m) (m)
0.00 -616.0 -166.9 -285.0 0.00 100 0.893 0.075 0.000 0.064
1.07 -362.8 -98.3 -167.8 0.01 200 1.787 0.076 0.001 0.169
3.13 -218.9 -59.3 -101.3 0.05 300 2.680 0.079 0.004 0.306
19.67 -81.4 -60.9 -71.1 0.93 616 5.504 0.145 0.070 1.506
29.94 -75.7 -66.5 -71.1 4.39 685 6.120 0.405 0.330 4.858
ɇɚɞɭɛɢɧɢ z,0 Pɧɟʄɟɫɟ ʁɚɜɢɬɢ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɚɛɭɞɭʄɢɞɚ ʁɟɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɢɫɩɨɞ

ɞɨʃɟ ɩɪɨɩɢɫɚɧɟ ɝɪɚɧɢɰɟ. Ⱦɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɢ ɪɚɞɢʁɭɫ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɭ ɨɜɨɦ ɢɧɬɟɪɜɚɥɭ ɢɡɧɨɫɢʄɟ
a=ainit=0,075 m.
ɉɊɈɊȺɑɍɇɇɈɋɂȼɈɋɌɂɂɇȳȿɄɐɂɈɇɈȽɆɂɄɊɈ-ɒɂɉȺ
ɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɲɢɩɨɜɚɤɨʁɢɭ ɜɟɥɢɤɨʁ ɦɟɪɢ ɦɟʃɚʁɭ ɢɧɢɰɢʁɚɥɧɨ ɫɬɚʃɟ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ

ɭ ɨɤɨɥɧɨʁ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ, ʁɨɲɭɜɟɤɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ ɫɩɟɰɢɮɢɱɚɧɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɢɡ ɨɛɥɚɫɬɢ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɤɟ.
ɋɬɨɝɚɫɭ ɢɧɠɟʃɟɪɢɭɫɥɟɞ ɨɞɫɭɫɬɜɚɦɟɬɨɞɚɚɧɚɥɢɡɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɤɨɞ ɨɜɨɝ ɬɢɩɚɦɢɤɪɨ-
ɲɢɩɨɜɚ, ɩɪɢɧɭɻɟɧɢɞɚɭ ɩɪɚɤɫɢ ɤɨɪɢɫɬɟ ɬɡɜɩɨɥɭ-ɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɟ ɦɟɬɨɞɟ. ɐɢʂ ɨɜɨɝ ɪɚɞɚ
ʁɟ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚʃɟ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɟ ɡɚ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɨɜɢɯ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɚɬɚ ɬɪɟɬɢɪɚʁɭʄɢ
ɩɪɢɬɨɦ ɢ ɟɮɟɤɚɬ ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɩɪɟɡɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚ ɧɚɱɢɧɚ ʃɢɯɨɜɟ ɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɟ ɆɄȿ
ɚɧɚɥɢɡɟ. ɉɨʁɟɞɢɧɟɬɟɨɪɢʁɟ ɬɟɠɟɞɚ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɧɚɜɪɯɭ ɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɚɱɧɨɝ ɲɢɩɚ (Qb)
ɫɢɦɭɥɢɪɚʁɭ ɩɟɧɟɬɪɚɰɢɨɦ ɲɢɩɚ ɭ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɭ ɭ ɜɢɞɭ ɫɮɟɪɢɱɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ. Vesic (1970)
ɩɪɜɢ ɪɚɡɪɚɻɭʁɟ ɚɧɚɥɨɝɢʁɭ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɫɮɟɪɢɱɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ ɢɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɧɚ ɜɪɯɭ ɲɢɩɚ, ɩɪɢ
ɱɟɦɭ ʁɟ ɩɨɫɦɚɬɪɚɧ ɦɟɯɚɧɢɡɚɦ ɩɪɨɞɨɪɚ ɤɪɭɬɨɝ ɤɨɧɭɫɚ ɭ ɬɥɨ. Ɂɚɜɢɫɧɨɫɬ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ
ɭɥɬɢɦɚɬɢɜɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɭ ɛɚɡɢ ɲɢɩɚ ɤɨʁɚ ɫɟ ɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɢɪɚɧɨ ɩɨɦɟɪɚ qb), ɥɢɦɢɬɭʁɭʄɟɝ
ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ (plim) ɢ ɧɨɜɢɯ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɢɯ ɩɪɟɤɨ ɫɮɟɪɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ, ɞɟɮɢɧɢɲɟ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬQb) ɤɚɨ:
ܳ௕ = ‫ݍ‬௕ ‫݌ = ܣ כ‬௟௜௠ (1 + ‫ כ )ߙ݃ݐ כ ߜ݃ݐ‬ʏ = 4983,0 ‫ כ‬0,085 = 425,9 ݇ܰ (5)

424
ɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧ ɫɢɥɟ ɬɪɟʃɚ (Qsɧɚɤɨɧɬɚɤɬɭ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɫɦɟɲɟ ɢɨɤɨɥɧɟ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɟɚ
ɭɡɢɦɚʁɭʄɢɭɨɛɡɢɪ ɢɟɮɟɤɚɬ ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɜɪɲɢɫɟ ɬɡɜ. K - ɦɟɬɨɞɨɦ. ɄɨɟɮɢɰɢʁɟɧɬK ʁɟ
ɪɚɧɢʁɟ ɢɡɪɚɱɭɧɚɬ ɢɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚɨɞɧɨɫ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɪɚɞɢʁɚɥɧɢɯ ɢɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɢɯ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ ɢɡ
ɧɨɜɨɝ ɫɬɚʃɚ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ. ɇɚɬɚʁ ɧɚɱɢɧɢɡɪɚɱɭɧɚʄɟ ɫɟ ɧɨɜɚ ɛɨɱɧɚ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚɧɚɤɨɧɬɚɤɬɭ
ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɢɬɥɚ, ɩɨɜɟʄɚɜɚʃɟɦ ɢɧɢɰɢʁɚɥɧɨɝ ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɨɝ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ p0 ɫɥɢɤɚ
3). ɍɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤ ɧɟ ɢɡɜɪɲɢ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɭ ɭ ɨɤɨɥɧɨʁ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɢ ɢɥɢ
ɩɪɨɦɟɧɭ ɝɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɟ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɬɚ, ɫɦɚɬɪɚɫɟɞɚ ɛɨɱɧɢɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɦɨɠɟɞɚɫɟɡɚɩɢɲɟ ɤɚɨɢɭ
ɢɧɢɰɢʁɚɥɧɨɦ ɫɬɚʃɭ.
ɋɥɢɤɚ 3. ɉɪɢɤɚɡɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɬɢɜɧɢɯ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɚɬɚ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɢɞɢɫɬɪɢɛɭɰɢʁɟ ɛɨɱɧɢɯ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ

Figure 3. Preview of constructive elements of micro-pile and distribution of radial stresses
ɇɚɤɨɧ ɭɬɜɪɻɢɜɚʃɚ ɧɨɜɨɝ ɫɬɚʃɚ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ ɢ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ, ɦɨɠɟ ɞɚ ɫɟ
ɢɡɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɢɭɥɬɢɦɚɬɢɜɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɬɪɟʃɚɋ ɨɛɡɢɪɨɦ ɧɚ ɩɪɨɦɟɧɭ ɞɢʁɚɦɟɬɪɚ ɩɨɞɭɛɢɧɢ,
ɱɢʁɚʁɟɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚɢɩɪɨɦɟɧɚɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚɫɢɥɚɬɪɟʃɚɬɪɟɛɚ ɞɚɫɟɢɡɪɚɱɭɧɚ ɩɨɫɟɛɧɨɡɚ
ɫɜɚɤɢ ɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɟɱɧɢ ɫɟɝɦɟɧɬ:
௅
ߑܳ௦ = ߨ ‫ܦ כ‬௜ ‫׬ כ ߜ݃ݐ כ‬଴ ߪ௥ ‫ܳ = ݖ݀ כ‬௦ଵ + ܳ௦ଶ + ܳ௦ଷ = 183,7݇ܰ (6)
ɇɍɆȿɊɂɑɄȺȺɇȺɅɂɁȺɂɇȳȿɄɐɂɈɇɈȽ ɆɂɄɊɈ-ɒɂɉȺ
ɇɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɚ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɚ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɟɧɚ ʁɟ ɭ ɩɪɨɝɪɚɦɫɤɨɦ ɩɚɤɟɬɭ PLAXIS 2D. ɋ ɨɛɡɢɪɨɦ ɧɚ
ɝɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɭ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚɤɨʁɢ ʁɟɫɢɦɟɬɪɢɱɚɧɭ ɨɞɧɨɫɭ ɧɚɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɭ ɨɫɭ,
ɚɧɚɥɢɡɚ ɫɟ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɞɢ ɤɚɨ ɤɥɚɫɢɱɧɢ ɚɤɫɢɫɢɦɟɬɪɢɱɧɢ ɡɚɞɚɬɚɤ. ɉɨɥɭɩɪɨɫɬɨɪ ɬɥɚ ɢ
ɝɟɨɦɟɬɪɢʁɚɲɢɩɚ ɦɨɞɟɥɨɜɚʄɟɫɟ ɫɚ ɬɪɨɭɝɚɨɧɢɦ ɤɨɧɚɱɧɢɦ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɬɢɦɚ ɫɚ 15 ɱɜɨɪɢɲɧɢɯ
ɬɚɱɚɤɚ, ɬɢɦɟ ɲɬɨ ʁɟ ɦɪɟɠɚ ɡɝɭɫɧɭɬɚ ɫɚ ɮɚɤɬɨɪɨɦ 0,10 ɭ ɨɦɨɬɚɱɭ ɢ ɛɚɡɢ ɲɢɩɚ. Ɂɨɧɟ
ɤɨɧɬɚɤɬɚ ɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɞɜɟ ɥɢɬɨɥɨɲɤɟ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɟ ɨɞɜɨʁɟɧɟ ɫɭ ɫɩɨʁɧɢɦ ɟɥɟɦɟɧɬɢɦɚ ɫɚ
ɜɢɪɬɭɟɥɧɨɦ ɞɟɛʂɢɧɨɦ (Rinter=1). Ɉɧɢ ɫɭ ɨɬɤɥɨʃɟɧɢ ɧɚɤɨɧ ɫɩɪɨɜɨɻɟʃɚ ɰɢɥɢɧɞɪɢɱɧɟ
ɛɨɱɧɟ ɢ ɫɮɟɪɢɱɧɟ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɟ ɭ ɛɚɡɭ. ɉɨɧɚɲɚʃɟ ɬɥɚ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɟɧɨ ʁɟ ɧɟɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɢɦ
ɯɢɩɟɪɛɨɥɢɱɧɢɦ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢɨɧɨ-ɭɱɜɪɲʄɭʁɭʄɢɦ ɡɚɤɨɧɨɦ Duncan&Chang-a, ɞɨɤ ʁɟ
ɦɟɯɚɧɢɡɚɦ ɥɨɦɚ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɟɧ Mohr-Coulomb-ɨɜɨɦ ɩɪɚɜɨɦ ɥɨɦɚ.
425
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ 3. Ɋɟɩɪɟɡɟɧɬɚɬɢɜɧɟ ɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɢɫɬɢɤɟɬɥɚ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɧɟɥɢɧɟɚɪɧɨɦ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɧɨɦ ɡɚɤɨɧɭ

Table 3. Representative soil characteristics according to nonlinear material law
Ɂɚɩɪɟɦɢɧɫɤɚ ɍɝɚɨ Ɇɨɞɭɥ Ɇɨɞɭɥ ȿɤɫɩɨɧɟɧɬ
ɍɝɚɨɬɪɟʃɚ Ʉɨɯɟɡɢʁɚ
ɬɟɠɢɧɚ ɞɢɥɚɬɚɧɰɢʁɟ ɟɥɚɫɬɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɪɚɫɬɨɜɚɪɚ ɯɢɩɟɪɛɨɥɟ
ȖN1P3) ĳȗ) Ȍȗ) c (kPa) E50 (kPa) EUR (kPa) m (----)
20.5 35.0 10.0 20.0 18500 55500 0.55
ɋɥɨɠɟɧɭ ɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɭ ɤɨʁɚ ɫɟ ʁɚɜʂɚ ɭ ɩɪɨɰɟɫɭ ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɫɦɟɲɟ ɩɨɞ ɜɢɫɨɤɢɦ
ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦ ɭ ɨɤɨɥɧɭ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɭ ɬɪɟɛɚɲɬɨʁɟɦɨɝɭʄɟ ɜɟɪɨɞɨɫɬɨʁɧɢʁɟɫɢɦɭɥɢɪɚɬɢɭ ɦɨɞɟɥɭ.
Ɂɚɬɨɫɟɭ ɩɪɜɨʁ ɮɚɡɢ ɤɨɪɢɫɬɟ ɜɟʄ ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɩɨɞɚɰɢɨ ɢɡɦɟɪɟɧɢɦ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚɦɚ ɞɢʁɚɦɟɬɪɚ
ɩɨ ɞɭɠɢɧɢ ɢ ɭ ɝɥɚɜɢ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɫɥɢɤɚ , ɝɞɟ ɫɟ ɨɩɰɢʁɨɦ „Prediscribed
displacements“, ɫɢɦɭɥɢɪɚɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢʁɚɫɚ ɤɨɧɬɪɨɥɢɫɚɧɢɦ ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɦɚ. ɍɰɢʂɭɞɚɫɟ
ɡɚɩɚɦɬɢ ɩɪɨɦɟɧɚ ɧɚɩɪɟɡɚʃɚ ɭ ɫɜɢɦ ɮɚɡɚɦɚ, ɤɨʁɚ ɫɟ ʁɚɜʂɚ ɤɚɨ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬ ɮɨɪɫɢɪɚɧɟ
ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɟ, ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜɢʄɟɫɟ ɤɪɨɡ ɨɩɰɢʁɭ „Updated Mesh”. ɍɞɪɭɝɨʁ ɮɚɡɢɩɪɟɞɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɚ
ɩɨɦɟɪɚʃɚɫɟɨɞɫɬɪɚʃɭʁɭ ɢɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɚɫɦɟɲɚɫɟɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚɭ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɭɲɬɨɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ
ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩ. Ⱥɩɥɢɰɢɪɚ ɫɟ ɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɚɱɧɢ ɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɢɪɚɧɢ ɬɟɪɟɬ „A³ ɧɚ ɝɥɚɜɢ ɲɢɩɚ, ɤɪɨɡ
ɨɩɰɢʁɭ „Staged construction“, ɞɚɛɢɫɟɭɩɨɫɥɟɞʃɨʁ ɮɚɡɢ ɢɡɜɪɲɢɥɨɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɞɨɥɨɦɚ,
ɤɪɨɡɨɩɰɢʁɭ „Incremental multipliers“. ɉɨɧɚɲɚʃɟ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚɤɚɤɨɢɨɰɟɧɚɩɨɞɨɛɧɨɫɬɢ
ɩɪɢɦɟʃɟɧɟ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɟ, ɩɪɨɰɟɧɢʄɟ ɫɟ ɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɟɦ ɤɪɢɜɭʂɚ ɫɢɥɚ-ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ ɢɡ
ɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɨɝ ɦɨɞɟɥɚ ɢɩɪɨɛɧɢɯ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ. Ⱦɨɛɢʁɟɧɟɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢ ɭɩɨɪɟɞɢʄɟ
ɫɟ ɢɫɚ ɨɧɢɦ ɢɡ ɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɢɯ ɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɚ.
Ɍɚɛɟɥɚ 4. Ɇɟɪɟɧɟ ɢɧɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɟ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɡɚɤɪɢɜɭʂɭ ɫɢɥɚ-ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɭ ɝɥɚɜɢ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ

Table 4. Measured and numerical gained values for curve force-deformation in micro-pile head
(*) ɉɪɨɛɧɨɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɇɭɦɟɪɢɱɤɢɦɟɬɨɞ
ȼɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɚ ȼɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɚ
ɋɥɟɝɚʃɟ ɋɥɟɝɚʃɟ
ɫɢɥɚ ɫɢɥɚ
(kN) (mm) (kN) (mm)
70 -0.5 91 -1.6
240 -3.5 324 -6.7
360 -7.0 439 -13.3
490 -27.0 494 -27.8
ɋɥɢɤɚ 4. (*) ɉɪɢɤɚɡɤɪɢɜɭʂɟ ɫɢɥɚ-ɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚɭ ɝɥɚɜɢ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ

Figure 4. (*) Preview of curve force-deformation in micro-pile head
426
ɁȺɄȴɍɑȺɄ
ɇɨɫɢɜɨɫɬ ɢ ɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɟ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɧɟ ɦɨɠɟ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɩɪɨɰɟɧɢ ɞɨ
ɡɚɞɨɜɨʂɚɜɚʁɭʄɟɝ ɫɬɟɩɟɧɚ ɬɚɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɭɤɨɥɢɤɨ ɫɟ ɭɨɛɡɢɪɧɟ ɭɡɦɟ ɟɮɟɤɚɬ ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ –
ɩɨɞɜɢɫɨɤɢɦ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɦ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦ – ɭɨɤɨɥɧɭ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɭ. ɇɚɢɦɟɫɥɨɠɟɧɚɢɧɬɟɪɚɤɰɢʁɚ
ɤɨʁɚ ɫɟ ʁɚɜʂɚ ɭ ɩɪɨɰɟɫɭ ɭɛɪɢɡɝɚɜɚʃɚ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɫɦɟɲɟ ɩɨɞ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɨɦ ɭ ɨɤɨɥɧɭ
ɫɪɟɞɢɧɭ ʁɟ ɜɚɧ ɫɜɚɤɟ ɫɭɦʃɟ, ʃɢɯɨɜɚ ɧɚʁɜɟʄɚ ɩɪɟɞɧɨɫɬ ɍ ɨɜɨɦ ɪɚɞɭ ɧɚɩɪɚɜʂɟɧ ʁɟ
ɧɚɩɨɪɫɚ ɭɫɩɟɲɧɢɦ ɪɟɡɭɥɬɚɬɨɦ, ɞɚɫɟɬɨɭɪɚɞɢ ɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɢɦ ɩɭɬɟɦ, ɤɪɨɡ ɫɢɦɭɥɚɰɢʁɭ
ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɬɟɨɪɢʁɢ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ. ɂɦɚʁɭʄɢ ɭ ɜɢɞɭ ɩɪɢɯɜɚɬʂɢɜɚ
ɨɞɫɬɭɩɚʃɚɢɡɦɟɻɭ ɢɡɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɢɯ ɢɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɢɯ ɮɚɤɬɢɱɤɢɯ ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɦɨɠɟɫɟɡɚɤʂɭɱɢɬɢ
ɞɚʁɟɩɪɢɦɟɧɚɨɜɟ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɟɤɨʁɚʁɟɭ ɡɚɬɜɨɪɟɧɨɦ ɨɛɥɢɤɭ, ɨɩɪɚɜɞɚɧɚ ɡɚɚɧɚɥɢɡɭ ɤɨɞ
ɧɟɤɢɯ ɩɪɚɤɬɢɱɧɢɯ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɚ. Ɋɚɡɥɢɤɟ ɭ ɩɨɝɥɟɞɭ ɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɨɜɚ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɭ
ɞɨɛɢʁɟɧɟ ɚɧɚɥɢɬɢɱɤɢɦ ɩɭɬɟɦ ɢɨɧɢɯ ɢɡ ɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɢɯ ɦɟɪɟʃɚɫɭ ɧɟɡɧɚɬɧɟ. Ɂɚɜɟɪɢɮɢɤɚɰɢʁɭ
ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɟɛɢʄɟ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɚ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɚ ɢɩɨɪɟɻɟʃɟ ʁɨɲɧɟɤɢɯ ɬɟɪɟɧɫɤɢɯ ɦɟɪɟʃɚɲɬɨʁɟ
ɰɢʂ ɧɟɤɢɯ ɧɚɪɟɞɧɢɯ ɢɫɬɪɚɠɢɜɚʃɚ Ɉɜɚ ɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɚ ɦɨɠɟ ɞɚ ɫɟ ɤɨɪɢɫɬɢ ɫɚɦɨ ɭ
ɞɢɫɩɟɪɡɧɢɦ (ɡɟɦʂɚɧɢɦ ɫɪɟɞɢɧɚɦɚ ɢɥɢ ɤɨɦɩɥɟɬɧɨ ɞɟɝɪɚɞɢɪɚɧɢɦ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɢɦ ɦɚɫɚɦɚ,
ɤɨɞɤɨʁɢɯʁɟɫɬɟɩɟɧɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɨɫɬɢ 54'ɚɡɚɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɟ pp<p<Rf*plim. Ɂɚ
ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɟ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɟ ɢɫɩɨɞ ɜɪɟɞɧɨɫɬɢ ɩɚɫɢɜɧɨɝ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɤɚ ɬɪɟɛɚ ɩɪɢɦɟɧɢɬɢ ɬɟɨɪɢʁɭ
ɫɤɭɩʂɚʁɭʄɟ ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟ.
Ɂɚɯɜɚɥɧɢɰɚ
Ⱥɭɬɨɪɢ ɢɡɪɚɠɚɜɚʁɭ ɡɚɯɜɚɥɧɨɫɬ ɤɨɦɩɚɧɢʁɢ HekTec B.V. ɤɨʁɚ ʁɟ ɞɨɡɜɨɥɢɥɚ ɤɨɪɢɲʄɟʃɟ
ɩɨɞɚɬɚɤɚ ɢɡ ɩɪɨɛɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɨɝ ɦɢɤɪɨ-ɲɢɩɚ ɬɡɜ. HekPile, ɤɨʁɢ ʁɟ
ɪɟɝɢɫɬɪɨɜɚɧɢ ɩɚɬɟɧɬɢɜɥɚɫɧɢɲɬɜɨ ɨɜɟ ɤɨɦɩɚɧɢʁɟ.
ɅɂɌȿɊȺɌɍɊȺ:
ɇɢɤɨɥɨɜɫɤɢ Ⱦ.: Ⱦɟɮɢɧɢɫɚʃɟɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɟɡɚɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɢɤɨɞɢɧʁɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɯɦɢɤɪɨ-

ɲɢɩɨɜɚɢɚɧɤɟɪɚɤɪɨɡɦɨɞɟɥɨɜɚʃɟɟɮɟɤɬɚɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɟɩɪɟɦɚɬɟɨɪɢʁɢɟɤɫɩɚɧɡɢɨɧɟ
ɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɟɧɚɦɚɤɟɞɨɧɫɤɨɦʁɟɡɢɤɭȾɟɮɢɧɢɪɚʃɟɧɚɦɟɬɨɞɨɥɨɝɢʁɚɡɚɩɪɟɫɦɟɬɤɚɧɚ
ɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɤɚʁɢɧɟɤɰɢɨɧɢɦɢɤɪɨ-ɤɨɥɨɜɢ ɢɚɧɤɟɪɢɩɪɟɤɭɦɨɞɟɥɢɪɚʃɟɧɚɟɮɟɤɬɨɬɧɚ
ɢɧɫɬɚɥɚɰɢʁɚɩɨɬɟɨɪɢʁɚɧɚ ɟɤɫɩɚɧɞɢɪɚɱɤɚɩɪɚɡɧɢɧɚ). ɆɚɝɢɫɬɚɪɫɤɢɪɚɞȽɪɚɞɟɠɟɧ
ɮɚɤɭɥɬɟɬɋɤɨɩʁɟ 2019.
Yu H. S., Houlsby G.T.: The finite cavity expansion in dilatant soils. University of Oxford,
Department of Engineering Science. 1991.
427
SWUXþQLUDG
UDK 625.7/.8:33(497.11)
UTICAJ ZONE KLIZIŠTA DRŽAVNIH PUTEVA

NA EKONOMSKE PARAMETRE
TRANSPORTNOG SISTEMA
9HOLERUND&YLMRYLü, Dragana %RåRYLü-6HODNRYLü,
Goran Maletiü=RUDQ5DGRMHYLü
Institut IMS a.d., Bul. vRMYRGH0LãLüD%HRJUDG6UELMD

veliborka.markovic@institutims.rs
REZIME
U radu je prikazana metodologija pristupa ekonomskim parametrima transportnog sistema
usled pojave klizišta na putnoj infrastrukturi sa ciljem da se definiše postupak za procenu
troškova na transportnoj mreži. Direktni troškovi na trasi traju sve do trenutka završetka
sanacionih radova i uspostavljanja VDREUDüDMD. Ekonomsko-sociološke i društvene posledice
su prisutne i u periodu nakon sanacije.
./-8ý1(5(ý,: Ekonomski parametri, transportni sistem, državni put, troškovi
IMPACT OF LANDSCAPE ZONE ON STATE ROAD

ON ECONOMIC PARAMETERS OF TRANSPORT
SYSTEM
ABSTRACT
The paper presents a methodology for approaching the economic parameters of the transport
system due to the occurrence of landslides on the road infrastructure in order to define a
procedure for estimating costs on the transport network. Direct costs on the route last until
the time of completion of remediation work and the establishment of traffic. Economic and
sociological and social consequences are also present in the period after rehabilitation.
KEY WORDS: Economic parameters, transport system, state road, costs
UVOD
U Republici Srbiji postoji baza podataka o klizištima kao i veliki broj projektno-WHKQLþNih
rešenja sanacija istih, ali PDORSDåQMHVHSRVYHüXMHHNRQRPVNLPJXELFLPDXVOHGXWLFDMD zone
klizišta na transportni sistem. Od ukupne teritorije pretpostavlja VHGDMHRNRREXKYDüHQR
procesima klizanja i drugim nestabilnostima 0-RWLü ( Slika 1) .
428
Slika 1. Pregledna karta klizišta na državnim putevima Srbije

Figure 1. Overview map of landslides on state roads of Serbia
KLASIFIKACIJA TROŠKOVA NA TRANSPORTNOM SISTEMU
Prema raspoloživim podacima u literaturi postoji preko 1000 klizišta na državnoj i lokalnoj
putnoj mreži. Klizišta na trasi puta izazivaju usporenja i prekide u putnoj mreži i time
uzrokuju direktne i indirektne gubitke. U troškove koje stvara klizište QDMþHãüHVHrazmatra
429
samo direNWQD ãWHWD QD VDREUDüDMQLFL UD]RUHQRVW RNROLQH L IL]LþND RãWHüHQMD QD SXWX L
YUDüDQMH X SUYRELWQR VWDQMH EH] UD]PDWUDQMD JXELWDND NRMH MH SUHWUSHR WUDQVSRUWQL VLVWHP
Direktni troškovi traju sve do trenutka završetka sanacionih radova dok su indirektni troškovi
(ekonomsko-sociološke posledice) i smanjenje društvene aktivnosti i dalje prisutni na datom
SRGUXþMX
Slika 2. Vrste troškovi na transportnom sistemu usled pojave klizišta na putu

Figure 2. Types of costs on the transportation system due to the occurrence of
landslides on the road
Parametri po kojima se mogu razvrstati troškovi usled pojave klizišta su (Winter & Bromhead
(2012)) :
- direktni ekonomski troškovi

- GLUHNWQLSRVOHGLþQLHNRQRPVNLtroškovi
- LQGLUHNWQLSRVOHGLþQLHNRQRPVNLtroškovi
1DMMHGQRVWDYQLMH MH SURUDþXQDWL GLUHNWQH HNRQRPske troškove na putnoj mreži koji se

RGUHÿXMX nivoom materijalne štete koju prouzrokuje klizište.
Direktni ekonomski troškovi su:
1. 7URãNRYLþLãüHQMDVDREUDüDMQLFHLWURãNRYLSRWUDJHLVSDãDYDQMD
2. Saniranje putnog pojasa (potporni zidovi, mostovi, propusti, drenaže, kolovozna
konstrukcija, stambeni objekti...)
$QJDåRYDQRVWSROLFLMHLRVLJXUDYDMXüih društava (državna administracija)
430
'LUHNWQLSRVOHGLþQLHNRQRPVNLtroškovi se odnose na promene u transportnom sistemu i na

JXELWDN XSRWUHEOMLYRVWL VDREUDüDMQH PUHåH ProblematiþQD mesta na mreži su: primena
suženje puta ili devijacije WRNRP L]YRÿHQMD UDGRYD QD SXWX, obilazni put usled zatvaranja
deonice...
8 VOXþDMX zatvaranja puta usled pojave klizišta ili radova na putu, korisnici üH krenuti
obilaznim pUDYFLPD þLPH VH SRYHüDYDYUHPH SXWRYDQMD. 7DNRÿH kada je zatvorena jedna
polovina puta, korisnici su WDNRÿH izloženi dužem vremenu putovanja usled usporenog
kretanja LOLQDL]PHQLþQRJNUHWDQMD u konfliktnoj zoni.
Na primer, može se odrediti koliko se vremena duže putuje ako se vozilo NUHüH zaobilaznom
rutom. Troškovi dužeg putovanja mogu VHL]UDþXQDWLQDRVQRYXYUHGQRVWLvremena putovanja
VoT (Value of Time) ili RSHUDWLYQRJNRULãüHQMDYR]LOD (troškovi eksplotacije vozila 1) VoC
(Vehicle Operating Costs).
U 3ULUXþQLNX ]D DQDOL]X WURãNRYD L NRULVWL -3 3XWHYL 6UELMH data je vrednost vremena
putovanja (VoT) u 2019. godini:
Prevoz putnika 7.10 €/h

Prevoz tereta 0.31 €/h/t
8 9HOLNRM %ULWDQLML VH SULPHQMXMX VLPXODFLRQL PRGHOL 6802 48$'52 ]D SURUDþXQ
direktnih SRVOHGLþQLKWURãNRYD3ULNDONXODFLMLVHNRULVWH,-C matrice ( (izvor-cilj matrice) ili
O-D matrice (origin-GHVWLQDWLRQ PDWUL[ NUHWDQMD X ]RQL X NRMRM VH REXVWDYOMD VDREUDüDM
1DYHGHQLSURJUDPUDþXQDWURãNRYHQDRVQRYXVYLKNUHWDQMDGRELMHQDL],-C matrice, srednje
vrednosti vremena putovanja (VoT)...
Svetska banka je razvila softver HDM- NRML VH þHVWR NRULVWL ]D SURFHQX operativnog
NRULãüHQMDYR]LOD VoC (potrošnja goriva, amortizacija...). Parametri koji se unose u softver
su:
- Kategorija vozila (pXWQLþNHDXWRPRELOHODNDWHUHWQDYR]LOD/79WHãNDWHUHWQDYR]LOD779

autobuse
- Brzina vožnje
- 6WDQMHSRYUãLQHNRORYR]DPHÿXQDURGQLLQGHNVUDYQRVWL,5,
- Podužni nagib i dr.
Jedna RGPHWRGD]DSURUDþXQWURãNRYDNRMDVHSULPHQMXMHX2UHJRQXOregon Department of

Transportation, SAD) NRULVWLVOHGHüXIRUPXOX
1
Terminologija koja se koristi u dokumentu Pravilnik za analizu troškova i koristi JP
Putevi Srbije
431
ܶ‫ ݐܱ כ ݐ ( = ݎ‬+ ݃ ‫[ ܵܦܲ כ )ܿ כ‬$]
Tr - Troškovi zatvaranja puta

t - vremenski period zatvaranja puta
Ot - operativni troškovi po satu (VoC)
g- dodatno potrošeno gorivo
c- cena goriva
PDS – 3URVHþQLGQHYQLVDREUDüDM
3URUDþXQVHUDGLSRJUXSDPDYR]LODMHUVHRperativni troškovi i potrošnja goriva razlikuju u

zavisQRVWL RG WLSD YR]LOD SXWQLþNR ODNR WHUHWQR WHãNR WHUHWQR YR]LOR. Konaþna suma
troškova je zbir troškova za sve grupe vozila.
Primer
Detour cost = [Detour time*Operating costs + Extra fuel used*Fuel price]*Number of

travelers affected
Detour cost = Detour time*Operating costs (per hour)*ADT + Extra fuel (in gallons)*fuel
price (in gallons)*ADT
Detour cost (cars) = (2.47 hours)($13.95)(1836) +(6.2 gallons)($1.40/gallon)(1836) =
$79,199
Ulazni mHVHþQL podaci o brojanju LLQWH]LWHWXVDREUDüDMDu toku radnog dana ili vikendom
PRJX ]QDþDMQR GD VH UD]OLNXMX WRNRP godine. TDþQa procena strukture VDREUDüDMnog toka
vršila bi se na osnovu prethodne godine u periodu zatvaranja puta.
,QGLUHNWQL SRVOHGLþQL HNRQRPVNL troškovi su aktivnosti koje su prisutne X GXJRURþQRP

vremenskom periodu. 3RþLQMX VD SRMDYRP QHVWDELOQRVWL QD GHRQLFL L WUDMX nakon sanacije
klizišta. Na primer, aNRMHRGUHÿHQDdeonica zatvorena na duži period ili se na deonici usled
suženja puta ili devijacije javljaju gužve X VDREUDüDMX, RVHWLüH se posledice na lokalnoj
industriji, turizmu. PRMDYLüH VH negativni ekološki efekti i loša reputacija u javnom
informisanju. 3ULVWXS WUåLãWX MH RJUDQLþHQ ãWR üH se ]QDþDMQR odraziti na poslovni profit
lokalne teritorije. 8VOXþDMXSRWSXQRJSUHNLGDVDREUDüDMDGRlokalne zajednice sprovode se
PHUHKLWQHLQWHUYHQFLMHEH]RE]LUDQDYHOLþLQXLRELPãWHWH.
8SRMHGLQLPVWUXþQLPradovima prikazano je smanjenje ekonomske aktivnosti u oblastima

SRJRÿHQLm QHSRJRGDPDLSRYHüDQMHHNRQRPVNe aktivnosti u drugim oblastima kao rezultat
NRULãüHQMD DOWHUQDWLYQRJSUDYFD. Usled zaustavljanja i stajanja vozila uz stalni rad motora
GROD]LGRSRYHüDQMDNRQFHQWUDFLMHštetnih materija iz izduvnih gasova6DPLPWLPSRYHüDYD
VH]DJDÿHQMHYRGH]HPOMLãWDLYD]GXKD
=$./-8ý$.
Direktni HNRQRPVNH WURãNRYH QD SXWQRM PUHåL VH RGUHÿXMX QLYRRP PDWHULMDOQH ãWHWH NRMX
prouzrokuje klizište. U radu su prikazane neke od metoda za SURUDþXQ direktnih SRVOHGLþQLK
432
troškova usled pojave klizišta na putnoj mreži. Indirektne SRVOHGLþQe ekonomske troškove je
najteže odrediti, jer su oni velikog geografskog i društveno-ekonomskog raspona. Važnost
svih navedenih ekonomskih parametara transportnog sistema može da ukazuje na izbor
prioriteta pri sanaciji klizišta. 7DNRÿHSULOLNRPL]UDGHSODQVNHGRNXPHQWDFLMHza izgradnju
novih putnih koridora sugeriše se RGUHÿLYDQMD svih navedenih troškova prilikom procene
stepena UL]LNDQDNULWLþQLPGHRQLFDPD
Zahvalnost
Zahvaljujem se kolegi Milovanu JotiüXGLSOLQåJHROQDSRGDFLPDiz baze podataka klizišta
LITERATURA
[1] Klizišta LãWHWHQDVDREUDüDMQRMLQIUDVWUXNWXULX6UELML0LORYDQ-RWLü i dr. 2015

[2] Klizišta i štete na državnim putevima Srbije, nastale kao SRVOHGLFDPDMVNLPEXMLþQLKSRSODYD
2014 0LORYDQ-RWLü i dr. 2016
[3] Katastar klizišta na državnim putevima Srbije 0LORYDQ-RWLü i dr. 2018
[4] 8WLFDMHNVWUHPQLKSDGDYLQDLPDMVNLKEXMLþQLKSRSODYDJRGLQHQDIRUPLUDQMHNOL]LãWDQD
državnim putevima Srbije 0LORYDQ-RWLü i dr. 2015
[5] Landslide indirect losses:methods and case studies from Oregon / Amanda MacLeod, R. Jon
Hofmeister, Yumei Wang, and Scott Burns 2005
[6] The Economic Impact of Landslides and Floods on the Road Network / Mike G Winter, Barbara
Shearer, Derek Palmer , David Peeling, Clare Harmer and Jonathan Sharpe 2016
[7] Impact on transport networks, effects on regional economy and policy decisions / Clemens
Pfurtscheller, Elisabetta Genovese 2018
>@3ULUXþQLN]DDQDOizu troškova i koristi JP Putevi Srbije 2010
[9] General Master Plan for transport in Serbia 2009
[10] Extending natural hazard impacts: an assessment of landslide disruptions on a national road
transportation network / Benjamin Postance, John Hillier, Tom Dijkstra and Neil Dixon
433
Struþni rad
UDK 624.137
ɉɊɂɆȿɇȺɊȿɒȿȵȺȺȻȽȺɅȿɊɂȳȿɁȺ
ɁȺɒɌɂɌɍɉɍɌȿȼȺɈȾɈȾɊɈɇȺ
ɇɢɤɨɥɚȻɨɠɨɜɢʄ ɆɚɪɢʁɚɄɪɫɬɢʄɄɪɢɫɬɢɧɚȻɨɠɢʄ-Ɍɨɦɢʄ
nikola.bozovic@institutims.rs
ɊȿɁɂɆȿ
ɍ ɪɚɞɭ ɫɟ ɩɪɢɤɚɡɭʁɟ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɚɬ ɡɚɲɬɢɬɟ ɩɭɬɚ ɨɞ ɩɨɬɟɧɰɢʁɚɥɧɟ ɨɩɚɫɧɨɫɬɢ ɢɫɩɚɞɚʃɚ
ɫɬɟɧɫɤɢɯ ɛɥɨɤɨɜɚ ɢɡ ɫɬɟɧɟ ɢɡɧɚɞ ɩɨɪɬɚɥɚ ɬɭɧɟɥɚ ɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɟ ɫɭ ɞɜɟ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ ɩɪɢ
ɱɟɦɭʁɟɭɪɚɞɭɨɩɢɫɚɧɩɪɨʁɟɤɚɬɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟɧɚɢɡɥɚɡɧɨɦɩɨɪɬɚɥɭɬɭɧɟɥɚɉɨɫɟɛɧɚɩɚɠʃɚʁɟ
ɭɫɦɟɪɟɧɚ ɧɚ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɟ ɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɬɟɬɚ ɭɞɚɪɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɢ ʃɟɝɨɜɨ ɚɩɥɢɰɢɪɚʃɟ ɧɚ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɭ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ Ɂɚ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɟ ɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɬɟɬɚ ɭɞɚɪɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɩɪɢɦɟʃɟɧ ʁɟ
ɲɜɚʁɰɚɪɫɤɢ ɩɪɨɩɢɫ ÄASTRA 12 006 – Action de chutes dae pierres sur les galeries de
protection“.
ɄȴɍɑɇȿɊȿɑɂɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɚɫɬɟɧɚ, ɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɚɫɢɥɚ
APPLICATION OF ROCK-FALL PROTECTIVE RC

STRUTURES FOR ROAD PROTECTION
ABSTRACT
The paper presents a project to protect the road from the potential danger of rock blocks
falling out of from the above the tunnel portal. Two protective structrures have been designed,
and the project describes the project on the tunnel exit portal. Particular attention is given to
determining the intensity of the impact load and its application to the construction of the
gallery. In order to determine the intensity of the impact force, a Swiss regulation was applied
„ASTRA 12 006 – Action de chutes dae pierres sur les galeries de protection“.
KEY WORDS: rock-fall protective structure, rock, dynamic force
ɍȼɈȾ
ɇɚɞɪɠɚɜɧɨɦɩɭɬɭIB-23, ɞɟɨɧɢɰɚ Ɇɢʁɨɫɤɚ– Ƚɨɫɬɭɧɞɨɲɥɨʁɟɞɨɜɟɥɢɤɢɯɞɟɮɨɪɦɚɰɢʁɚ

ɧɚɞɟɫɧɨʁɤɨɫɢɧɢɭɫɟɤɚɫɦɟɪɤɚȽɨɫɬɭɧɭɭɲɢɪɢɧɢɩɨɩɭɬɭɨɤɨm ɢɞɭɠɢɧɢɨɞɜɪɯɚ
ɤɨɫɢɧɟ ɞɨ ɧɨɠɢɰɟ ɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ ɪɢɝɨɥɟ ɨɤɨ m Ⱦɨ ɧɚɫɬɚɧɤɚ ɨɞɪɨɧɚ ɨɞɧɨɫɧɨ ɩɪɟɤɢɞɚ
ɩɭɬɚɞɨɲɥɨʁɟɤɚɨɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚɜɪɥɨɫɬɪɦɨɝɧɚɝɢɛɚɭɡɛɪɞɧɟɤɨɫɢɧɟɩɭɬɚ!ɤɨʁɢʁɟ
ɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧ ɨɞ ɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɜɧɨ ɢɫɩɭɰɚɥɢɯ ɤɪɟɱʃɚɤɚ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ ɫɬɚɥɧɨ ɨɫɢɩɚʁɭ ɢ ɮɨɪɦɢɪɚʁɭ
ɫɢɩɚɪɟɭɞɧɭɤɨɫɢɧɟ
434
ɉɨɫɟɛɧɭ ɨɩɚɫɧɨɫɬ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚʁɭ ɧɟɫɬɚɛɢɥɧɢ ɛɥɨɤɨɜɢ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ ɧɚɥɚɡɟ ɭ ɜɟɪɬɢɤɚɥɧɢɦ

ɤɨɫɢɧɚɦɚɭɥɚɡɧɨɝɢɢɡɥɚɡɧɨɝɩɨɪɬɚɥɚɬɭɧɟɥɚ
ɀɭɬɢɤɭɤ
.
Ɂɚ ɡɚɲɬɢɬɭ ɬɪɭɩɚ ɩɭɬɚ ɢɥɢ ɚɭɬɨɩɭɬɚ ɢ ɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɚ ɧɚ ʃɢɦɚ ɨɞ ɚɤɬɢɜɧɨɝ ɢɥɢ
ɩɨɬɟɧɰɢʁɚɥɧɨɝ ɡɚɬɪɩɚɜɚʃɚ ɞɪɨɛɢɧɫɤɢɦ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɨɦ ɝɪɚɞɟ ɫɟ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ Ƚɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ ɫɭ
ɫɩɟɰɢɮɢɱɧɟɚɪɦɢɪɚɧɨɛɟɬɨɧɫɤɟɦɨɧɨɥɢɬɧɟɢɥɢɩɨɥɭɦɨɧɬɚɠɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɊɟɲɟʃɚ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟɫɭɜɪɥɨɫɩɟɰɢɮɢɱɧɚɢɪɚɡɥɢɱɢɬɚʁɟɪɡɚɜɢɫɟɨɞɜɢɲɟɮɚɤɬɨɪɚɚ
ɩɪɜɟɧɫɬɜɟɧɨ ɨɞ ɨɛɥɢɤɚ ɧɚɤɥɨɧɚ ɩɪɢɪɨɞɧɟ ɢɥɢ ɜɟɲɬɚɱɤɟ ɤɨɫɢɧɟ, ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɟ ɝɪɚɻɟ
ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɤɨɫɢɧɟɢɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɟɧɚɤɨʁɨʁɫɟɩɥɚɧɢɪɚɢɡɝɪɚɞʃɚɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ, ɨɛɥɢɤɚɢɫɚɫɬɚɜɚ
ɞɪɨɛɢɧɫɤɨɝ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ, ɨɛɢɦɚɢɧɚɱɢɧɚɩɪɢɜɪɟɦɟɧɟɡɚɲɬɢɬɟɤɨɫɢɧɚɭɬɨɤɭɪɚɞɨɜɚɧɚ
ɢɡɝɪɚɞʃɢɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ, ɜɟɥɢɱɢɧɟɨɛʁɟɤɬɚɬɟɯɧɨɥɨɝɢʁɟɢɪɨɤɨɜɚɢɡɝɪɚɞʃɟ
ɇɚɫɥɢɰɢʁɟɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɢɡɝɥɟɞɢɡɥɚɡɧɨɝɩɨɪɬɚɥɚ ɢɡɬɭɧɟɥɚ
ɋɥɢɤɚɂɡɥɚɡɧɢɩɨɪɬɚɥɬɭɧɟɥɚ
ɀɭɬɢɤɭɤ
-ɫɬɚʃɟɧɚɬɟɪɟɧɭ
Figure 1. Portal of the tunnel '' Žuti kuk'' - the state of the field
ȽȿɈɌȿɏɇɂɑɄɈɂɋɌȺɀɂȼȺȵȿɌȿɊȿɇȺ
Ɍɪɚɫɚɩɭɬɚɧɚɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɨʁɞɟɨɧɢɰɢʁɟɭɡɚɫɟɤɭɝɞɟʁɟɜɢɫɢɧɚɧɚɫɢɩɚɫɚɥɟɜɟɫɬɪɚɧɟɫɦɟɪ
ɤɚȽɨɫɬɭɧɭɨɞɤɨɪɢɬɚɪɟɤɟɅɢɦɚamɚɫɚɞɟɫɧɟɫɬɪɚɧɟɜɢɫɢɧɚɡɚɫɟɤɚɩɚɞɢɧɟʁɟ
ɩɪɟɤɨm.
ɂɫɬɪɚɠɧɨɛɭɲɟʃɟʁɟɪɚɻɟɧɨɭɰɢʂɭɭɬɜɪɻɢɜɚʃɚɥɢɬɨɝɟɧɟɬɫɤɢɯɫɬɪɭɤɬɭɪɧɢɯɢ
ɬɟɤɫɬɭɪɧɢɯɫɜɨʁɫɬɚɜɚɢɡɞɜɨʁɟɧɢɯɥɢɬɨɝɟɧɟɬɫɤɢɯɫɪɟɞɢɧɚɭɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɢɬɟɪɟɧɚ
ɂɡɜɟɞɟɧɨʁɟɭɤɭɩɧɨɢɫɬɪɚɠɧɟɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟɩɨʁɟɞɢɧɚɱɟɧɟ ɞɭɛɢɧɟam -20.00m. Ɍɪɢ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɟɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɟɫɭɧɚɦɟɫɬɭɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɢɯɲɢɩɨɜɚɡɚɧɢɡɛɪɞɧɢɪɚɦɞɨɤʁɟɱɟɬɜɪɬɚ
ɛɭɲɨɬɢɧɚ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɤɪɨɡ ɬɪɭɩ ɩɭɬɚ Ɂɚ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɟ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚʃɚ ɧɚɱɢɧɚ ɢ ɞɭɛɢɧɟ
ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚʃɚ ɤɚɦɟɧɨɝ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝ ɡɢɞɚ ɢɡɜɪɲɟɧ ʁɟ ɩɪɟɝɥɟɞ ɞɜɚ ɪɚɫɤɨɩɚ ɢɡɜɟɞɟɧɚ ɨɞ
ɫɬɪɚɧɟɢɡɜɨɻɚɱɚɪɚɞɨɜɚɭɡɨɧɢɧɨɠɢɰɟɤɚɦɟɧɨɝɡɢɞɚɇɚɦɟɫɬɭɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɢɯɲɢɩɨɜɚ
ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɢɫɚɫɬɚɜɬɟɪɟɧɚɱɢɧɟ
0.00 – 1.50m- ɇɚɫɢɩ,
435
1.50 – 5.50m- Ʉɪɟɱʃɚɤɬɟɤɬɨɧɫɤɢɨɲɬɟʄɟɧɢɢɡɥɨɦʂɟɧ,

5.50 – 20m- Ƚɥɢɧɚɩɪɚɲɢɧɚɫɬɚɫɚɫɢɬɧɨɦɫɬɟɧɫɤɨɦɞɪɨɛɢɧɨɦ.
ɇɚɫɢɩɬɪɭɩɚɩɭɬɚɢɫɩɨɞɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɧɟɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɢɡɝɪɚɻɟɧʁɟɨɞɬɟɤɬɨɧɫɤɢɨɲɬɟʄɟɧɨɝ
ɢɢɡɥɨɦʂɟɧɨɝɤɪɟɱʃɚɤɚ
ɌȿɏɇɂɑɄɂɈɉɂɋɍɋȼɈȳȿɇɈȽɊȿɒȿȵȺ
Ƚɚɥɟɪɢʁɚɭɨɫɧɨɜɢʁɟɞɢɦɟɧɡɢʁɚm x 12m. ɍɫɜɨʁɟɧʁɟɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɢɫɢɫɬɟɦɞɜɚɩɨɞɭɠɧɚ

ɪɚɦɚ ɫɚ ɥɟɜɟ ɢ ɞɟɫɧɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɩɭɬɚ ɭ ɩɨɞɭɠɧɨɦ ɩɪɚɜɰɭ ɍ ɩɪɚɜɰɭ ɭɩɪɚɜɧɨ ɧɚ ɩɭɬ ȺȻ
ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɚɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚɭɤʂɟɲɬɟɧɢɪɚɦɫɚɡɝɥɨɛɧɨɦɜɟɡɨɦɫɬɭɛɨɜɚɢɪɢɝɥɟɪɚɦɚ
ɇɢɡɛɪɞɧɢɪɚɦɱɢɧɟɱɟɬɢɪɢɫɬɭɛɚ ɧɚɨɫɨɜɢɧɫɤɨɦɪɚɫɬɨʁɚʃɭɨɞ4.0m ɢx3.0mɞɨɤɫɭ
ɤɨɞɭɡɛɪɞɧɨɝɪɚɦɚɫɬɭɛɨɜɢɧɚɪɚɫɬɟɪɭm ɢx2.85mɇɟʁɟɞɧɚɤɢɪɚɫɬɟɪɢɫɬɭɛɨɜɚɭ
ɪɚɦɨɜɢɦɚ ɩɨɫɥɟɞɢɰɚ ɫɭ ɩɨɫɬɨʁɚʃɚ ɩɪɨɩɭɫɬɚ ɤɨʁɢ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɡɚɯɬɟɜɢɦɚ ɢɧɜɟɫɬɢɬɨɪɚ ɧɢʁɟ
ɛɢɥɨ ɞɨɡɜɨʂɟɧɨ ɪɭɲɢɬɢ ɒɚɯɬ ɫɚ ɭɡɛɪɞɧɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ʁɟ ɩɪɚɜɨɭɝɚɨɧɨɝ ɨɛɥɢɤɚ ɨɡɢɞɚɧ
ɤɚɦɟɧɢɦɛɥɨɤɨɜɢɦɚɢɫɟɱɟɞɟɨɬɟɦɟʂɚɩɨɫɬɨʁɟʄɟɝɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝɡɢɞɚɉɪɨɩɭɫɬɜɨɞɟɢɫɩɨɞ
ɩɭɬɚ ɧɢʁɟ ɭɩɪɚɜɚɧ ɧɚ ɨɫɨɜɢɧɭ ɩɭɬɚ ɩɚ ɫɚɦɢɦ ɬɢɦ ɧɢ ɪɚɦɨɜɢ ɧɢɫɭ ʁɟɞɧɚɤɢɯ ɪɚɫɬɟɪɚ
ɫɬɭɛɨɜɚ ɂɡɥɚɡɧɚ ɝɥɚɜɚ ɩɪɨɩɭɫɬɚ ʁɟ ɫɚɫɬɚɜɧɢ ɞɟɨ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɨɞ ɤɚɦɟɧɢɯ
ɛɥɨɤɨɜɚɫɚɧɢɡɛɪɞɧɟɫɬɪɚɧɟɩɭɬɚ
Ⱦɨɞɚɬɧɢɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɢɩɪɢɥɢɤɨɦɧɚɥɚɠɟʃɚɪɟɲɟʃɚʁɚɜɢɥɢɫɭɫɟɡɛɨɝɩɨɫɬɨʁɚʃɚɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢɯ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɫɚ ɭɡɛɪɞɟɧɟ ɢ ɧɢɡɛɪɞɧɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɡɚɫɟɤɚ Ɂɛɨɝ ɫɬɚɛɢɥɧɨɫɬɢ ɧɚɫɢɩɚ ɢ
ɤɨɥɨɜɨɡɧɟ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɩɭɬɚ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢ ɤɚɦɟɧɢ ɡɢɞ ɫɚ ɧɢɡɛɪɞɧɟ ɫɬɪɚɧɟ ɧɢʁɟ
ɩɪɟɩɨɪɭɱʂɢɜɨ ɪɭɲɢɬɢ Ɍɚɤɨɻɟ ɡɛɨɝ ɧɟɩɨɭɡɞɚɧɢɯ ɩɨɞɚɬɚɤɚ ɨ ɭɫɥɨɜɢɦɚ ɢ ɧɚɱɢɧɭ
ɮɭɧɞɢɪɚʃɚ ɡɢɞɨɜɚ ɬɪɟɛɚɥɨ ʁɟ ɢɡɛɟʄɢ ɛɢɥɨ ɤɚɤɜɨ ɨɫɥɚʃɚʃɟ ɧɚ ɩɨɫɬɨʁɟʄɟ ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɟ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɡɚɛɭɞɭʄɢɩɪɨʁɟɤɚɬȺȻɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ
ɭ ɭ ɪ ʁ ɪ ʁ
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɨɩɪɟɱɧɢɩɪɟɫɟɤɪɟɲɟʃɚȺȻɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ
Figure 2. AB gallery cross section
436
ɋɥɢɤɚɉɨɞɭɠɧɢɩɪɟɫɟɰɢɪɟɲɟʃɚȺȻɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ
Figure 3. Longitudinal sections of the AB Gallery solution
Ɂɛɨɝɢɡɥɨɠɟɧɢɯɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɚɧɢɡɛɪɞɧɢɪɚɦʁɟɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɧɧɚɛɭɲɟɧɢɦɲɢɩɨɜɢɦɚɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɚ
800mmɞɭɠɢɧɟmɤɨʁɢɫɭɭɞɚʂɟɧɢɨɞɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝɤɚɦɟɧɨɝɡɢɞɚcca 1mɒɢɩɨɜɢɫɭ
ɩɨɜɟɡɚɧɢɧɚɝɥɚɜɧɨɦɝɪɟɞɨɦɡɚɪɚɜɧɨɦɟɪɧɭɪɚɫɩɨɞɟɥɭɭɬɢɰɚʁɚɢɡɫɬɭɛɨɜɚɪɚɦɚɋɬɭɛɨɜɢ
ɫɭɤɜɚɞɪɚɬɧɨɝ ɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝɩɪɟɫɟɤɚɧɚɤɨʁɟɫɟɨɫɥɚʃɚɪɢɝɥɚ ɫɚɩɪɟɩɭɫɬɨɦ Ƚɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝ
ɩɪɟɫɟɤɚ
ɍɡɛɪɞɧɢɪɚɦɫɟɩɥɢɬɤɨɮɭɧɞɢɪɚɧɚɬɟɦɟʂɢɦɚɫɚɦɰɢɦɚɋɬɭɛɨɜɢɪɚɦɚɫɭɩɪɚɜɨɭɝɚɨɧɨɝ
ɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝɩɪɟɫɟɤɚɊɢɝɥɚɪɚɦɚʁɟɤɨɧɬɢɧɭɚɥɧɚɫɚɩɪɟɩɭɫɬɨɦȽɩɨɩɪɟɱɧɨɝɩɪɟɫɟɤɚ
Ɂɛɨɝ ɨɫɥɨɛɚɻɚʃɚ ɭɡɛɪɞɧɨɝ ɪɚɦɚ ɨɞ ɩɪɢɬɢɫɚɤɚ ɬɥɚ ɭ ɡɚɥɟɻɭ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ ɢ ɨɛɟɡɛɟɻɟʃɚ
ɩɪɨɫɬɨɪɚɩɪɢɥɢɤɨɦɢɡɜɨɻɟʃɚɪɚɞɨɜɚɩɪɟɞɜɢɻɟɧɨʁɟɪɭɲɟʃɟɩɨɫɬɨʁɟʄɟɝɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɨɝɡɢɞɚ
ɢɮɨɪɦɢɪɚʃɚɡɢɞɚɨɞɝɚɛɢɨɧɚɋɜɪɯɚɡɢɞɚʁɟɞɚɩɪɢɦɢɭɬɢɰɚʁɟɨɞɧɚɫɭɬɨɝɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɭ
ɡɚɥɟɻɭɢɡɚɲɬɢɬɢɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɭɨɞɭɩɚɞɚɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɨɞɨɫɭɥɢɧɚɫɚɤɨɫɢɧɟ
ɇɚɪɚɦɨɜɟɫɟɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɚʁɭɦɨɧɬɚɠɧɢɌɧɨɫɚɱɢɤɨʁɢɫɭɦɨɧɨɥɢɬɢɡɨɜɚɧɢɫɥɨʁɟɦɛɟɬɨɧɚ
ɤɨʁɢ ɭʁɟɞɧɨ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚ ɤɪɨɜɧɭ ɩɥɨɱɭ ȺȻ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ ɂɡɧɚɞ ɪɚɦɨɜɚ ɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚɧɢ ɫɭ
ɡɢɞɨɜɢɤɨʁɢɡɚʁɟɞɧɨɫɚɩɨɪɬɚɥɧɢɦɡɢɞɨɜɢɦɚɢɤɪɨɜɧɨɦɩɥɨɱɨɦɮɨɪɦɢɪɚʁɭɤɨɪɢɬɨɡɚ
ɲʂɭɧɚɤ ɤɨʁɢ ɢɦɚ ɮɭɧɤɰɢʁɭ ɞɚ ɩɪɢɝɭɲɢ ɭɬɢɰɚʁ ɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɨɞ ɨɞɪɨʃɟɧɨɝ
ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ
ɈȾɊȿȭɂȼȺȵȿɈɉɌȿɊȿȶȿȵȺɈȾɍȾȺɊȺɄȺɆȿɇɈȽȻɅɈɄȺ
Ɂɚ ɩɪɚɜɢɥɧɭ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɭ ɚɧɚɥɢɡɭ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɚ ɛɢɬɚɧ ʁɟ ɩɪɚɜɢɥɚɧ ɢɡɛɨɪ
ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ ɦɨɞɟɥɚ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɤɨʁɢ ɫɟ ɧɚʁɜɢɲɟ ɩɪɢɛɥɢɠɚɜɚ ɫɬɜɚɪɧɨɦ ɩɨɧɚɲɚʃɭ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ Ƚɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ ɫɭ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟɧɟ ɜɥɚɫɬɢɬɨɦ ɬɟɠɢɧɨɦ ɩɨɬɢɫɤɨɦ ɬɥɚ ɫɚ ɡɚɥɟɻɚ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟɬɟɠɢɧɨɦɧɚɫɢɩɚɧɚɞɝɨɪʃɨɦɩɥɨɱɨɦɢɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɨɦɫɢɥɨɦɤɚɦɟɧɚɤɨʁɢ
ɩɚɞɚɧɚɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɭ
437
Ɉɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟɨɞɭɞɚɪɚɤɚɦɟɧɨɝɛɥɨɤɚʁɟɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɨɝɤɚɪɚɤɬɟɪɚɤɨʁɟɫɟɭɩɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɫɤɢ
ɦɨɞɟɥ ɭɧɨɫɢ ɤɚɨ ɩɨɜɪɟɦɟɧɨ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɭ ɧɚʁɧɟɩɨɜɨʂɧɢʁɢ ɩɨɥɨɠɚʁ ɡɚ ɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɢ
ɟɥɟɦɟɧɬɭɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɢ
ɉɪɨɛɥɟɦɟɬɢɤɚ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɚ ɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɬɟɬɬɚ ɭɞɚɪɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ʁɟ ɫɥɨɠɟɧɚ ɢ ɧɢʁɟ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɚ
ɨɞɝɨɜɚɪɚʁɭʄɢɦɧɚɰɢɨɧɚɥɧɢɦɩɪɨɩɢɫɨɦɉɪɨɪɚɱɭɧɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɭʄɟɝɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ
ɧɚ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɭ ɜɪɲɢ ɫɟ ɩɪɟɦɚ ɲɜɚʁɰɚɪɫɤɨɦ ɩɪɨɩɢɫɭ ÄASTRA 12 006 – Action de
chutes dae pierres sur les galeries de protection“.
Ɂɚɩɨɬɪɟɛɟɩɪɢɝɭɲɟʃɚɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɨɝɭɞɚɪɚɧɚɤɪɨɜɭɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟɮɨɪɦɢɪɚɫɟɤɨɪɢɬɨɞɭɛɢɧɟ
2m ɧɚɩɭʃɟɧɨɲʂɭɧɤɨɦɁɚɩɨɬɪɟɛɟɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɚɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɭʄɟɝɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɨɝ
ɪɚɜɧɨɦɟɪɧɨ ɪɚɫɩɨɞɟʂɟɧɨɝ ɭɞɚɪɧɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɨ ʁɟ ɩɪɨɰɟɧɢɬɢ ɦɚɫɭ (mk) ɢ
ɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɭʄɢɩɪɟɱɧɢɤɨɞɥɨɦʂɟɧɨɝɤɨɦɚɞɚɫɬɟɧɟr) ɤɚɨɢɜɢɫɢɧɭ(H) ɫɚɤɨʁɟɛɢɬɚʁɤɨɦɚɞ
ɩɚɨɧɚɤɪɨɜɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟɌɚɞɚɫɟɡɚɭɫɜɨʁɟɧɭɜɢɫɢɧɭɧɚɫɢɩɚ (e) ɧɚɤɪɨɜɭɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟɢɦɨɞɭɥ
ɫɬɢɲʂɢɜɨɫɬɢ (Mek) ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚɤɨʁɢɫɚɱɢʃɚɜɚɧɚɫɢɩɨɞɪɟɻɭʁɟɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɬɟɬɭɞɚɪɧɟɫɢɥɟ
(Fk) ɩɪɟɦɚɢɡɪɚɡɢɦɚɤɨʁɢɫɥɟɞɟɭɧɚɫɬɚɜɤɭ
ɇɚɫɥɢɰɢʁɟɩɪɢɤɚɡɚɧɨɡɧɚɱɟʃɟɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɚɪɚɭɧɚɜɟɞɟɧɢɦɢɡɪɚɡɢɦɚ
Ad- ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɚɧɚɤɨʁɭɞɟɥɭʁɟɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟqt
438
Vk-ɛɪɡɢɧɚɩɚɞɚɤɨɦɚɞɚɫɬɟɧɟ
ɋɥɢɤɚ4ɉɪɢɤɚɡɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɚɢɧɬɟɧɡɢɬɟɬɚɭɞɚɪɧɟɫɢɥɟɨɞɨɞɪɨʃɟɧɨɝɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ
Figure 4. Demonstration of the determination of the intensity of the impact force
ɋɪɚɱɭɧɚɬɨ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɧɚ ɨɜɚʁ ɧɚɱɢɧ ʁɟ ɪɚɜɧɨɦɟɪɧɨ ɪɚɫɩɨɞɟʂɟɧɨ ɩɨɜɪɲɢɧɫɤɨ

ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɟ ɤɨʁɟ ɫɟ ɩɨɫɬɚɜʂɚ ɭ ɧɚʁɧɟɩɨɜɨʂɧɢʁɢ ɩɨɥɨɠɚʁ ɩɪɢ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɭ ɭɬɢɰɚʁɚ ɭ
ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɢɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɟ
ɁȺɄȴɍɑȺɄ
Ɉɞɪɨɧɢ ɫɚ ɜɢɫɨɤɢɯ ɤɨɫɢɧɚ ɱɟɫɬɢ ɫɭ ɭɡɪɨɤ ɧɟɫɪɟʄɚ ɩɪɢɥɢɤɨɦ ɜɨɠʃɟ Ɋɚɞɢ ɩɨʁɚɱɚɧɟ
ɛɟɡɛɟɞɧɨɫɬɢɭɨɞɜɢʁɚʃɭɫɚɨɛɪɚʄɚʁɚɤɚɨɢɡɚɡɚɲɬɢɬɭɩɭɬɧɟɢɧɮɪɚɫɬɪɭɤɬɭɪɟɩɪɢɦɟʃɭʁɭ
ɫɟ ɪɚɡɧɟ ɫɚɧɚɰɢɨɧɟ ɦɟɪɟ ɩɨɩɭɬ ɤɚɜɚʃɚ ɫɬɟɧɫɤɟ ɦɚɫɟ ɝɟɨɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɢɯ ɦɪɟɠɚ ɢɡɪɚɞɟ
ɩɨɬɩɨɪɧɢɯ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɚ ɡɚ ɩɪɢɯɜɚɬɚʃɟ ɨɞɪɨʃɟɧɨɝ ɦɚɬɟɪɢʁɚɥɚ ɤɚɨ ɢ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ
ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɚ ɇɚ ɢɡɝɥɟɞ ɤɨɧɫɬɪɭɤɰɢʁɟ ɝɚɥɟɪɢʁɚ ɭ ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɦ ɫɦɢɫɥɭ ɩɪɟɞɫɬɚɜʂɚʁɭ
ʁɟɞɧɨɫɬɚɜɚɧ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦ ɦɟɻɭɬɢɦ ɩɨɫɬɨʁɟ ɨɞɪɟɻɟɧɟ ɫɩɟɰɢɮɢɱɧɨɫɬɢ ɩɪɢ ɪɟɲɚɜɚʃɭ ɤɨʁɟ
ɧɢɫɭ ɞɟɮɢɧɢɫɚɧɟ ɩɪɨɩɢɫɢɦɚ ɩɨɩɭɬ ɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɚ ɭɬɢɰɚʁɚ ɭɞɚɪɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ Ɂɚ ɪɟɲɚɜɚʃɟ
ɬɚɤɜɢɯ ɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɚ ɩɨɬɪɟɛɧɨ ʁɟ ɫɩɪɨɜɟɫɬɢ ɞɟɬɚʂɧɚ ɝɟɨɥɨɲɤɚ ɢɫɩɢɬɢɜɚʃɚ ɞɚ ɛɢɫɟ
ɢɡɜɪɲɢɥɚɲɬɨɩɪɟɰɢɡɧɢʁɚɩɪɨɰɟɧɚɞɢɧɚɦɢɱɤɢɯɩɚɪɚɦɟɬɚɪɚɡɚɨɞɪɟɻɢɜɚʃɟɡɚɦɟʃɭʁɭʄɟɝ
ɫɬɚɬɢɱɤɨɝ ɨɩɬɟɪɟʄɟʃɚ ɭɞɚɪɧɟ ɫɢɥɟ ɍ ɨɜɨɦ ɪɚɞɭ ɩɪɟɞɥɨɠɟɧɨ ʁɟ ʁɟɞɚɧ ɨɞ ɧɚɱɢɧɚ
ɪɟɲɚɜɚʃɚɬɚɤɜɢɯɩɪɨɛɥɟɦɚ
ɉɪɨʁɟɤɬɧɨ-ɬɟɯɧɢɱɤɚɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɮɨɬɨɞɨɤɭɦɟɧɬɚɰɢʁɚɢɡȺɪɯɢɜɟɂɧɫɬɢɬɭɬɚɂɆɋ
ɉɟɬɚɪɆɢɬɪɨɜɢʄɋɚɧɚɰɢʁɚɤɥɢɡɢɲɬɚɢɧɟɞɨɜɨʂɧɚɧɨɫɢɜɨɫɬɬɥɚȻɟɨɝɪɚɞ
ɉɪɢɪɭɱɧɢɤɡɚɩɪɨʁɟɤɬɨɜɚʃɟɩɭɬɟɜɚɭɊɟɩɭɛɥɢɰɢɋɪɛɢʁɢȳɉɉɭɬɟɜɢɋɪɛɢʁɟ
Einwirkungen infolge Steischlags auf Schutzgalerien, Schweicerische Eidgenossenschaft
439
Pregledni rad
UDK 628.472
=1$ý$-,=92Ĉ(1-$352.725292*23,7$
NA KOMUNALNOM OTPADU
-RYDQD-DQNRYLü'UDJRVODY5DNLü7LQDĈXULü
,UHQD%DVDULü,NRGLQRYLü/DVORýDNL
Rudarsko- JHRORãNLIDNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWDX%HRJUDGXĈXãLQD- Beograd,
jovana.jankovic@rgf.bg.ac.rs
REZIME
.RPXQDOQLRWSDGSUHGVWDYOMDMHGDQRGNOMXþQLKSUREOHPDGDQDãQMLFH86UELMLMHQDMþHãüLYLG
odlaganja otpada na komunalne deponije i zbog toga je bitno ispravno i sigurno ga skladištiti.
Zbijanje komunalnog otpada predstavlja jednu od osnovnih komponenti procesa odlaganja.
Kako bi se što bolje predvidelo ponašanje komunalnog otpada neophodno je pre zbijanja na
terenu laboratorijski odrediti maksimalnu suvu zapreminsku težinu i optimalnu vlažnost. U
GRVDGDãQMRM SUDNVL X VYHWX ]D WR VH NRULVWL VWDQGDUGL]RYDQ 3URNWRURY RSLW 8 UDGX üH ELWL
SULND]DQLUH]XOWDWL3URNWRURYRJRSLWD]DNRPXQDOQLRWSDGNRMLMHX]HWVDQHXUHÿHQHGHSRQLMH
u Plandištu.
./-8ý1( 5(ý,NRPXQDOQLRWSDG]ELMDQMHGHSRQLMD3URNWRURYRSLW
THE IMPORTANCE OF PROCTOR TEST

PERFORMANCE ON MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
ABSTRACT
Municipal solid waste management is one of the crucial problems worldwide. In Serbia, the
most common forms of waste disposal are municipal landfills, and therefore it is important
to store it properly and safely. Municipal waste compacting is one of the basic components
of the disposal process. In order to better predict the behaviour of municipal waste, it is
necessary to determine the maximum dry unit weight and optimal moisture content before
compaction in the terrain, for which Standard Proctor test has been used in the world current
practice. This paper presents the results of the Proctor test for municipal waste taken from the
dump in Plandište.
KEY WORDS: municipal solid waste (MSW), compaction, landfill, Standard Proctor test
UVOD
.ROLþLQHNRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDVYDNRGQHYQRUDVWXEH]RE]LUDQDVSURYRÿHQMHUD]OLþLWLKPHUD
kako bi se to izbeglo. Iako se smatra jednim od nepovoljnijih rešenja, odlaganje na
komunalne deponije u Srbiji je i dalje najzastupljenije. Zbog toga je neophodno optimizovati
odlaganje na deponije i obezbediti bezbednost tokom eksploatacije i nakon zatvaranja. Proces
440
odlaganja komunalnog otpada odvija se u nekoliko faza: istovaranje, razastiranje, prekrivanje

LQDNUDMX]ELMDQMH=ELMDQMHPVHPHQMDMXIL]LþNR- PHKDQLþNH NDUDNWHULVWLNHRWSDGDþYUVWRüD
na smicanje, deformabilnost, vodoporopustljivost). Dobro zbijeni komunalni otpad zauzima
PDQMX]DSUHPLQXLRPRJXüXMH]QDWQRVLJXUQLMHVNODGLãWHQMH%H]RE]LUDQDWRX6UELMLQHPD
podataka o zbijanju komunalnog otpada. RazlRJ]DWRMHQDMþHãüHQHNRQWUROLVDQRRGODJDQMH
EH]SUHGKRGQRRGUDÿHQHDQDOL]H
-HGDQ RG RVQRYQLK þLQLRFD ]ELMDQMD NRPXQDOQRJ RWSDGD MH VDVWDY 2E]LURP QD L]UD]LWX
heterogenost i promenjivost, zbijanje se po pravilu vrši u slojevima jednake debljine. Kako
bi se što bolje iskoristio radni prostor deponije, neophodno je poznavati parametre zbijanja:
RSWLPDOQXYODåQRVWLPDNVLPDOQXVXYX]DSUHPLQVNXWHåLQXSULRGUHÿHQRMHQHUJLML]ELMDQMD(
0HÿXWLPEH]RE]LUDQD]QDþDMRYLKSDUDPHWDUDX6UELMLMRãXYHNQHSRVWoji praksa da se
RGUHÿXMX8VYHWXMHXJODYQRPNRULãüHQDLVWDPHWRGRORJLMDL]YRÿHQMD3URNWRURYRJRSLWDQD
komunalnom otpadu kao i kod tla, uz eventualnu redukciju energije zbijanja.
8UDGXüHELWLSULND]DQLUH]XOWDWLODERUDWRULMVNLKLVSLWLYDQMDQDNRPXQDlnom otpadu koji je

uzet sa QHXUHÿHQHGHSRQLMHX3ODQGLãWX3RUHGLüHVHYUHGQRVWLPDNVLPDOQHVXYH]DSUHPLQVNH
težine i optimalne vlažnosti, pre svega kroz promenu sastava.
PREGLED LABORATORIJSKIH ISPITIVANJA KOMUNALNOG OTPADA U

SVETU
Postoje ]QDþDMQH UD]OLNH X RVRELQDPD NRPXQDOQRJ RWSDGD 8 GDQDãQMH YUHPH VH WHåL
SRYHüDQMXSURVWRUDQDGHSRQLMDPDJGHVHPRåHRGODJDWLNRPXQDOQLRWSDG=ELMDQMHMHMHGQD
RG QDMLVSODWLYLMLK SD VDPLP WLP L QDMþHãüLK PHWRGD SRYHüDYDQMD ]DSUHPLQH SURVWRUD ]D
odlaganje komunalnog otpada.
3RMHGLQL LVWUDåLYDþL X VYHWX VX SULND]LYDOL UH]XOWDWH ]ELMDQMD WHUHQVNLK L ODERUDWRULMVNLK

istraživanja NRPXQDOQRJ RWSDGD JGH MH NRPHQWDULVDQR QMHJRYR VSHFLILþQR SRQDãDQMH .DR
MHGQXRGRVQRYQLKUD]OLNDLVWLþXNULYH]ELMDQMDNRMHVX NRGNRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDVD]QDþDMQR
PDQMHL]UDåHQLPYUKRPQHJRãWRMHWRVOXþDMNRGWOD3URPHQDVXYH]DSUHPLQVNHWHåLQHMH
znatno manje izražena u odnosu na promenu vlažnosti (Gabr and Valero 1995, Hettiarachchi
et al. 2005, Itoh 2005, Reedy et al. 2008). 8RYRPUDGXSDåQMDüHELWLSRVYHüHQMDL]YRÿHQMX
laboratorijskih opita.
Standardni Proktorov opit su izveli Gabr i Valero (1995) na komunalnom otpadu starom od
15 do 30 godina, koji je dobijen istražnim bušenjem. Maksimalna suva zapreminska težina
od 9,3 kN/m3 SRVWLJQXWD MH SUL RSWLPDOQRM YODåQRVWL RG 6WHSHQ ]DVLüHQMD MH L]QRVLR
približno oko 70%.
Itoh (2005) je pri nešto manjoj energiji zbijanja od 550 kJ/m3 odredio suvu zapreminsku
težinu od 5,9 kN/m3 pri optimalnoj vlažnosti od 20%.
HettiarachcKLHWDOVXL]YHOLVOLþDQWHVWVDPDNVLPDOQRPYHOLþLQRPþHVWLFDRG mm,

gde je konstatovana suva zapreminska težina od 5,5 kN/m3 pri optimalnoj vlažnosti od
441
=D VDVWDY RWSDGD MH XVYRMHQD SURVHþQD YUHGQRVW XþHãüD NRPSRQHQWL X 6$' JGH MH
speFLILþQDWHåLQDL]QRVLOD
5HGG\ HW DO VX WDNRÿH L]YHOL VWDQGDUGQL 3URNWRURY RSLW QD X]RUFLPD þLMD MH
PDNVLPDOQD YHOLþLQD þHVWLFD PP 3UL RSWLPDOQRM YODåQRVWL RG GRELMHQD MH VXYD
zapreminska težina od 4,2 kN/m3.
Wong (2009) je prikazao rezultate modifikovanog Proktorovog opita gde je pri optimalnoj
vlažnosti od 66% postignuta suva zapreminska težina od 5,1 kN/m3. Pored tog
ODERUDWRULMVNRJ WHVWD SRYHüDR MH HQHUJLMX ]ELMDQMD þHWUL SXWD =D WDNYX HQHUJLMX ]ELMDQMD
postignuta je suva zapreminska težina od 5,9 kN/m3, pri optimalnoj vlažnosti od 56%.
+DQVRQHWDOMHQDLVWLQDþLQNDRLSUHGKRGQLDXWRUGRãDRGRUH]XOWDWDDOLVDWULUD]OLþLWD

VDVWDYDNRMDVXNDWDNWHULVWLþQD]DRGUHÿHQHUHJLRQH7XUVND(YURSDL6$'2YDNDYSULVWXS
je autor odabrao zbog izraženih razlika u ekonomskom i industrijskom smislu, što se ogleda
X UD]OLþLWLP SURFHQWXDOQLP XþHãüLPD NRPSRQHQWL =D PRGLILNRYDQ 3URNWRURY RSLW UDVSRQ
maksimalne suve zapreminske težine je od 3,37 kN/m3 do 3,80 kN/m3 pri rasponu vlažnosti
RG GR 'RN ]D þHWUL SXWD SRYHüDQX HQHUJLMX ]ELMDQMD PDNVLPDOQD VXYD
]DSUHPLQVNDWHåLQDVHNUHüHXLQWHUYDOXRGN1P3 do 4,96 kN/m3 za optimalnu vlažnost
RG GR 3RUHÿHQMHP UH]XOWDWD DXWRUD VD LVWLP SULVWXSRP energiji zbijanja,
]DNOMXþXMHPR GD VH SUL SRYHüDQMX HQHUJLMH QDYLãH PHQMD PDNVLPDOQD VXYD ]DSUHPLQVND
težinu, uz smanjenu optimalnu vlažnost.
$QDOL]RPOLWHUDWXUQLKSRGDWDNDXRþDYDMXVH]QDþDMQHUD]OLNHPHÿXUH]XOWDWLPD Razlog za
RYR VH QDMþHãüH SULSLVXMH UD]OLþLWRP VDVWDYX NRPXQDOQRJ RWSDGDNDR L YHOLþLQDPD þHVWLFD
NRMHVXNRULãüHQHXVDPRPRSLWX=ERJWRJDMHRGYHOLNRJ]QDþDMDSULOLNRPODERUDWRULMVNLK
LVSLWLYDQMDRYHVWDYNHQDYHVWLNDRREDYH]QHXRSLVLPDãWRþHVWRQLMHVOXþDM
SASTAV I PRIPREMA UZORAKA
=D SRWUHEH L]YRÿHQMD 3URNWRURYRJ RSLWD QD NRPXQDOQRP RWSDGX X]HW MH PDWHULMDO VD
QHXUHÿHQHGHSRQLMHX3ODQGLãWXVWDURVWLRGoko 10 godina3ULSUHPOMHQLVXYHãWDþNLX]RUFLX
UD]OLþLWRP VDVWDYX NDNR EL VH SULND]DR QMHJRY XWLFDM na zbijanje. Uzorci su formirani na
osnovu dostupnog materijala uz kritrtijum njihovog ponašanja prilikom zbijanja. Izdvojene
NRPSRQHQWHVXWYUGDSODVWLNDIODãHSRVXÿHLVOSODVWLNDSODVWLþQHNHVHDPEDODåDRGKUDQH
i sl.) - tekstil- guma, metal- staklo- keramika, papir, drvo i ostali otpad (Slika 1). Pod „ostalim
otpadom“ podrazumeva se sav otpad koji prilikom sortiranja nije mogao da se izdvoji u neku
RGSUHGKRGQRSRPHQXWLKJUXSD.DUDNWHULãHJDYHOLNRXþHãüHÄ]HPOMDVWH³NRPSRQHQWH]D
koju se predpostavilo GDüHLPDWLUD]OLþLWRSRQDãDQMHXRGQRVXQDYHãWDþNHPDWHULMDOHDNRMD
MHþHVWRXXOR]LGQHYQLKSUHNULYNLQDGHSRQLMDPD3ULSUHPOMHQRMHþHWULX]RUNDVDRVQRYQRP
UD]OLNRPXþHãüDNRPSRQHQWHÄRVWDOLRWSDG³6DVWDYNRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDX]RUDNDSULND]DQMH
na Slici 1.
442
Slika 1:Prikaz sastava komunalnog otpada

Figure 1: Preview of municipal waste composition
1DNRQ VRUWLUDQMD NRPXQDOQRJ RWSDGD SULVWXSLOR VH SULSUHPL X]RUND NRMD XNOMXþXMH
homogenizaciju, mešanje i usitnjavanje svih komponenti. 0DNVLPDOQDYHOLþLQDNRPSRQHQDWD
XX]RUNXMHL]QRVLODPPNDNRELVHGRELRRGJRYDUDMXüLRGQRVJUDQXORPHWULMVNRMVDVWDYD
RWSDGD L GLPHQ]LMD NDOXSD X NRMLPD MH L]YRÿHQ 3URNWRURY RSLW 2E]LURP QD VSHFLILþQRVW
PDWHULMDODPDNVLPDOQDGLPHQ]LMDþHVWLFDXRGQRVXQDSUHþQLNNDOXSDMHXVYRMHQDQD
2'5(Ĉ,9$1-(0$.6,0$/1(689(=$35(0,16.(7(ä,1(,
OPTIMALNE VLAŽNOSTI
Proktorov opit je izveden na predhodno pripremljenim uzorcima u kalupu zapremine

2125cm3 (Slika 2). Zbijanje je izvedeno u 3 sloja sa 56 udaraca SRVORMXNRULãüHQMHPDOM
težine 2,5 kg koji pada sa visine od 30,5 cm. Energija zbijanja za ovako izveden opit iznosi
600kJ/m3&LOMMHRGUHÿLYDQMHRSWLPDOQRJVDGUåDMDYRGHVDNRMRPüHVHQDWHUHQXSUL]ELMDQMX
RVWYDULWLQDMYHüD]DSUHPLQVNDWHåLQDNRPXQalnog otpada. =DVYDNLRGþHWULVDVWDYDRGUDÿHQR
MHSHWUD]OLþLWLKWDþDNDNDNRELVHGRELODRGJRYDUDMXüD3URNWRURYDNULYD
443
Slika 2: Rezultati Standardnog Proktorovog opita

Figure 2: Results of the Standard Proctor Test
Na uzorku U- VD QDMYHüLPXþHãüHP NRPSRQHQWH ³RVWDOL RWSDG´ GRELMHQD MH PDNVLPDOQD
suva zapreminska težina J d =13.39 kN/m3, pri optimalnoj vlažnosti Z opt =19.30 %. Uzorak U-
3 ima maksimalnu suvu zapreminsku težinu J d =10.60 kN/m3 i optimalnu vlažnost Z opt =14.11
%. Uzorci U-2 i U-LPDMXVOLþDQREOLNNULYHQDãWDSUHVYHJDXWLþH³]HPOMDVWDŃRPSRQHQWD
6DSRYHüDQMHPYHãWDþNLKPDWHULMDODXX]RUFLPDGRELMHQe vrednosi za uzorak U-4 su J d =7.57

kN/m3 za optimalnu vlažnost Z opt =16.54 %. Na uzorku U-5 dobijena je maksimalna suva
zapreminska težina J d =7.36 kN/m3 i optimalna vlažnost J opt =24.68 %.
Rezultati Standardnog Proktorovog opita izvedeni u laboratoriji za mehaniku tla na

Rudarsko- JHRORãNRPIDNXOWHWXXND]XMXGDMHVDVWDYNRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDMHGDQRGNOMXþQLK
þLQLRFD]ELMDQMD1DMYLãHYUHGQRVWLVXYH]DSUHPLQVNHWHåLQHVX]DEHOHåHQHQDX]RUNX8-2 koji
X VHEL VDGUåL QDMYHüL SURFHQDW Ä]HPOMDVWH³ NRPSRQHQWH 7DNRÿH ELWQR MH L]GYRMLWL GD QD
]DSUHPLQVNX WHåLQX NRPXQDOQRJ RWSDGD X YHOLNRM PHUL XWLþH SULVXVWYR NRPSRQHQWH
ÄSODVWLND³2QDMHPDOHWHåLQHDYHOLNH]DSUHPLQHãWR]QDþDMQRXWLþHQDSRQDãDQMHX]RUND
SULOLNRP L]YRÿHQMD RSLWD 3RUHG WRJD XRþDYD VH ]QDþDMna promena optimalne vlažnosti u
odnosu na sastav otpada.
=$./-8ý$.
Komunalni otpad u Srbiji i dalje predstavlja jedan od osnovnih ekoloških problema

današnjice, bez obzira na postojanje savremenih tehnologija upravljanja. Kao jedan od
problema izdvaja se neoptimizovano zbijanje komunalnog otpada na deponijama, bez
SUHGKRGQRJSR]QDYDQMDVDVWDYDLRGUHÿLYDQMDODERUDWRULMVNLKSDUDPHWDUD
444
8UDGXMHSULND]DQRSRQDãDQMHNRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDXUD]OLþLWRPVDVWDYXNDRLXWLFDMHQHUJLMH
zbijanja standardnog Proktorovog opita na maksimalnu suvu zapreminsku težinu i optimalnu
vlažnost.
Ono što se postavlja kao osnovno pitanje je da li rezultati koji su definisani istim principom
kao kod tla, a na osnovu izvedenog Proktorovog opita, odgovaraju njegovoj primeni na
NRPXQDOQRPRWSDGXLGDOLGDMXRGJRYDUDMXüHSDUDUPHWUHRE]LURPQDVSHFLILþQRSRQDãDQMH
UD]OLþLWLK YUVWD NRPSDNWRUD QD GHSRQLMDPD =ERJ VYHJD RYRJD WUHED UD]PRWULWL SURPHQX
HQHUJLMH]ELMDQMDLOLREOLNDPDOMDNDRLPRJXüXNRUHNFLMXQMHJRYHWHåLQHLYLsine pada. Na
osnovu svega navedenog, neophodno je standardizovati metodologiju ispitivanja
NRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDNDNRELVHGRSULQHORãWREROMHPNRULãüHQMXSURVWRUDQDGHSRQLML
Zahvalnica
Ovaj rad je realizovan u okviru istraživanja za projekat TR 36014 koji se finansira od strane
Ministarstva prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja Republike Srbije.
LITERATURA:
Cox, J. T., Hanson, J., Yesiller, N., Clarin, J. & Noce, D. E.: Optimization of Compaction Procedures
and Waste Placement Operations at MSW Landfills, Global Waste Management
Symposium, Orlando, Florida. 2014.
Hanson, J.L., Yesiller., N., Von Stockhausen, S.A. and Wong, W. W.: Compaction Characteristics of
Municipal Solid Waste, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol.
136, No. 8. 2010.
-DQNRYLü-5DNLü' %DVDULü,&RPSDFWLRQRIPXQLFLSDOZDVWH;,QWHUQDWLRQDO6\PSRVLXPRQ
Recycling Tehnologies and Sustainable Development, Bor, Serbia. 2015.
Pulat, H.F. & Yukselen-Aksoy, Y.: Compaction behavior of synthetic and natural MSW samples in
different compositions, Waste Management & Research 12. 2013.
5DNLü'.RQVWLWXWLYQH]DYLVQRVWLNRPXQDOQRJRWSDGDVDGHSRQLMDX6UELML'RNWRUVNDGLVHUWDFLMD
Rudarsko- geološki fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu. 2013.
Wong, W.W. : Investigation of the geotechnical propertiesof municipal solid waste as a function of
placement conditions. MSc. thesis, California Polytechnic State Univ. San Luis Obispo,
USA. 2009.
445
2ULJLQDOQLQDXþQLrad
UDK 624.131.21
ANALYSIS OF LIQUEFACTION- RELATED

FOUNDATIONS OF UNDERWATER STEEL
PIPELINE
Zika Smiljkovic
Beograd, Serbia, zikas@beotel.rs
ABSTRACT
Liquefaction related foundation, is a specific area of design expertise. There are several
methods on how to resolve the fine sands that are going to liquefy. First one is recent advances
in soil liquefaction engineering. Correspondingly, the important additional issues such as
analysis of liquefaction, the post of liquefaction strength and stress–deformation behavior,
should be examined. We should locate the soil to be liquefied, and then to attract the SPT
based correlation, the N1 factor, the standardized value N 1,60 , and to calculate the stress
resistance ratio and cyclic stress ratio. Reckoning the safety coefficient which should be
equal/less than 1.5, meaning that fine sands is to be cyclic induced under proviso that Richter
stroke is greater than 7 1/2 . Second one is the PHASE program under which the model is to be
running. The seismic coefficient should the one to produce the earthquake at least to
9.0(Richter). The third one is the formula of Permanent Ground Acceleration. This is a
closed-form formula within which we could have the magnitude of earthquake and several
geo-seismic parameters, to calculate. The final conclusions about the tentative fine sands to
be displaced, is to be diapason between the first, second and third approach. For further
analyses see the article hereafter.
KEYWORDS: Liquefaction Engineering, PHASE Program, Permanent Ground

Acceleration.
ANALIZA LIKVEFAKCIJE TEMELJA

32'92'12*ý(/,ý12*&(9292'$
REZIME
/LNYHIDNFLMDWHPHOMDMHVSHFLILþQRSRGUXþMHHNVSHUWL]HPostoji nekoliko metoda kako da se
reši problematika sitnih peskova koji su skloni likvefakciji. Prvo je nedavni napredak u
inženjeringu likvefakcije. U skladu s tim, trebalo bi ispitati važna dodatna pitanja, kao što su
analiza likvefakcije, nosivost i naprezanje-deformacija nakon likvefakcije. Trebalo bi da
ORFLUDPR ]HPOMLãWH JGH üH GRüL GR OLNYHIDNFLMH D ]DWLP SULPHQLWLNRUHODFLMX ]DVQRYDQXQD
SPT, N1 faktoru, standardizovanu vrednost N 1,60 L L]UDþXQDWL RGQRV RWSRUQRVWL QD VWUHV L
FLNOLþNLRGQRVQDSRQD. Razmotzriti sigurnosni koeficijent koji treba biti jednak / manji od 1,5,
ãWR]QDþLGDVHVLWQLSHVDNFLNOLþQRLQGXNXMHSRGXVORYRPGDMH5LFKWHURYXGDUYHüLRG 1/2 .
'UXJLMHSURJUDP3+$6(XRNYLUXNRMHJVHYUãLPRGHOLUDQMH6HL]PLþNLkoeficijent trebalo
ELGDSURL]YHGH]HPOMRWUHVQDMPDQMHGR5LFKWHU7UHüDMHIRUPXODVWDOQRJXEU]DQMDWOD
446
2YRMHIRUPXOD]DWYRUHQRJREOLNDXQXWDUNRMHELVPRPRJOLL]UDþXQDWLPDJQLWXGX]HPOMRWUHVD
i nekoliko geo-VHL]PLþNLK SDUDPHWDUD .RQDþQL ]DNOMXþci o pomeranju finih peskovaELüH
L]PHÿXSUYRJGUXJRJLWUHüHJSULVWXSD=DGDOMHDQDOL]HSRJOHGDMWHþODQDNXQDVWDYNX
KLJ8ý1(5(ý,,QåHQMHULQJlikvefakcije, PHASE program, stalno ubrzanje tla.
INTRODUCTION
The section of circa 12km of Montenegro Ashore Water Supply System had to intersect the
Skadar’s Lake, beginning of intake pumping station until the pumping station intended to
drinking water transfer to Adriatic Cost consumers. The section had to be embedded within
the fine sands strata, the thickness of which extends to 5m on average. The exploratory
boreholes had detected the strata of highly plastic silts and gravels underlying the fine sands.
The fluvio - glacial sediments were found to be the bedrock base of the Lake deposits. The
Water Supply System was designed of two-OLQHVWHHOFRQYH\RUĭPPDQGĭPP7KH
7.3m waterbed had to act as outer hydrostatic pressure to steel conveyors. Table 1 hereafter,
visualizes the stratigraphy of Lake Deposits, the conveyor elevation inclusive.
The sequences of cyclic liquefaction hazard such as: (i) assessment of liquefaction
susceptibility, (ii) assessment of liquefaction potential, (iii) evaluation of cyclic induced dis-
placements of fine sands, and (iv) and the last, analysis of liquefaction mitigation measures,
were considered in the article.
Plate 1: Typical stratification model of the soils forming underwater deposits
SOIL LIQUEFACTION ENGINEERING
Assessment of Liquefaction Susceptibility1)
Soil liquefaction is a major cause of damage during the earthquakes. It has long been
recognized that relatively “clean” sandy soils with few fines, are potentially vulnerable to
seismically induced liquefaction. The cyclic behavior of coarse gravelly soils differs little
447
from that of “sandy” soils. However, the coarse gravelly soils do differ from their finer sandy
types in the following ways: (a) they can be much more pervious and thus can often rapidly
dissipate cyclically generated pore pressure, and (b) due to the mass of their larger particles,
the coarse gravelly soils are seldom deposited “gently” and so do not often occur in the very
loose states, more often encountered with finer sandy soils.
Table 1: Type of Soils extending down to the Skadar’s Lake6)
No. of the Soil Type of Soil Description of Soil Propertes

Sequence
Fine Sands Fine sand, partly silted and clayey, of loose to
1 medium density, and gray in color.
Highly Predominantly highly plastic silts of soft
2 Plastic Fine consistency. Liquefiable properties exhibited at
Silts surficial layer. Dark-gray to brown-gray color.
Sandy Fine to coarse gravel, of rounded grains, well
3 Gravel graded, and of grey color.
Soil engineering involves a number of discernible sub-issues the key elements of which are:
(1) assessment of liquefaction potential or, the risk of triggering or, initiation of liquefaction,
(2) once it is determined, the next is to proceed with assessment of available post-liquefaction
strength, (3) if post-liquefaction-stability is acceptable, then attention is next directed to
assessment of anticipated deformations and displacements, (4) thus, there are a few
guidelines on deformations and displacements on performance of the structures, (5) in cases
where the satisfactory structure performance cannot be counted on, engineered mitigation of
liquefaction risk is generally warranted.
Table 2: Soil Parameters associated with Liquefaction susceptibility6)

Parameter Description Fine Highly Plastic Sandy
Sands 1 Silts 2 Gravel
3
Undrained volumetric weight
14.85 15.30 17.25
ȖN1P3)
Drained volumetric weight
4.77 7.07 7.61
Ȗ¶N1P3)
Water content (%) 67.90 53.8 55.9
Plasticity Limit (%) 28.8 30.60 N/A
Liquid Limit (%) 45.0 59.30 N/A
Plasticity Index (%) 16.2 28.7 N/A
Gradeability
- Clay particles (< 0.002 mm) 7.7% 17.7% 2.4%
- Fine particles (< 0.005 mm) 27.7% 84.5% 12.9%
- Sand particles (< 4.76 mm) 96.2% 99.2% 50%
The liquefaction can be defined as: “classic” cyclic liquefaction which will refer to significant
loss of strength and stiffness due to cyclic pore generation, in contrast to “sensitivity” loss of
448
strength as a result of larger monotonic unidirectional shear displacements, aligned with the
term of strain softening.
Increased plasticity of soils results is in their more ductile behavior. Ground softening at sites
where critical soil layers contain more than 15% finer greadeability than 5mm. Percent of
clay fines is less important than overall contribution of fines to plasticity. Rather is the clay
minerals are present in the soil and their activity that are important. Accordingly, it appears
that cyclic testing of these types of soils with non-zero static driving shear stress is advisable
if this is potentially applicable to field conditions. In fact, saturation and rapid loading could
be potential conditions for liquefaction and low plasticity of poorly graded soils. In addition
to that, it can cause slow dissipation of seismically induced pore pressure due to low
permeability soil.
Assessment of Liquefaction Potential
There are two approaches for assessment: (1) Use of laboratory testing of “Undisturbed”
samples, and (2) Use of empirical relationships based on correlation of observed field
behavior with various in-situ “Index” test. The use of laboratory testing is complicated by
difficulties that arise with sample disturbance during both sampling and reconsolidation1).
Table 3: Susceptibility Correlations, Cross-Properties of Fine Sands and Liquefaction Susceptibility

Status
Reference Susceptibility Cross-Properties of Liquefaction
Correlations Fine Sands Stratum 1 Susceptibility Status
Modified Chinese (1) Percent of grains (1) Percent of grains Not generally susceptible
Criteria1). finer than 0.005mm: finer than 0.005mm: to ‘classic’ cyclically
Wong(1979); Seed 27.7 % induced liquefaction.
and Idriss(1982). /LTXLG/LPLW (2) Liquid Limit: 45%
35% (3) Water Content
(3) Water Content t 67.9% >0.9 LL=31.50
0.9 LL %
Andrews and (1) Clay fines(0.002 (1) Clay fines(0.002 Potential liquefaction
Martin(2000)1) mm) 10% mm ):7.7% susceptibility
(2) Liquid Limit 32% (2) Liquid Limit:
45%
Interim (1)Plasticity Index 20 (1)Plasticity Index 16.2 Potential liquefaction
Recommendation1) % % susceptibility
(2) Liquid Limit (2) Liquid Limit
47% 45%
(3) If Water Content is (3) Water Content 67
>0.8 LL % > 0.8 LL = 36.00%
Vs Susceptible Shear waves velocity Vs = 210 to 240 m/s Potentially liquefiable.
Correlation 1) 200 m/s for Fines recorded for depths up Note: The results of
content 6–34% to 10m2). Seismic geophysical prospecting
refraction method. Fines (1970) of saturated fine
content: 27.7%. sands strata underlying
‘Baosic’ and ‘Tivat’ sites
in Montenegro2).
449
SPT based correlations

On the basis of average number of blows of Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) for fine sands,
the highly plastic sands and sandy gravel, as well as relative density of them and descriptive
classification of them, all adopted in Reference7), the penetration resistance of the soils were
defined as follows:
Table 4: Records of Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) – N Values7) of Sands, Plastic Silts and Gravels
Relative density is defined as the ratio of the difference between the void ratio of cohesionless soil in the loosest *)
state and in-situ void ratio
Parameter Description Fine Sands Highly Plastic Sandy Gravel
1 2 3
Silts
Average Number of Blows [N] 9 (2-18) 10 (3-17) 32 (16-50)
Relative Density*) 15% – 35% 35% 35% - 65%
Descriptive Classification5) Very loose to Medium to very
Very soft to stiff5)
loose5) dense5)
Correction of SPT ‘N’ values to those governing under the overburden pressure of 1atm
N1 = N*CN, where: N1, is a hypothetical SPT value that would have been
measured if the effective overburden pressure at the depth of
SPT had been 1 atmosphere, and CN, is the corrective factor.
Total and Actual effective overburden pressure at
the depth of SPT in atmospheres:
Vvi J Hi J (kN / m 3 ) u H i (m ) 0.1u J u H i (dN / cm 2 )
The overburden depth at 2.50m and 4.50m:
§ 0.1 4.77 2.50 · § 1.19 ·
V 'v (2.5 m / 4,5 m ) ¸ dN / cm
2
¨ ¸ ¨
© 0.1 4.77 4.50 ¹ © 2.15 ¹
ª 3 § 2.5m · º ª § 37.13 · º
«14.85kN / m * ¨ ¸» « ¨ 66.83 ¸ »
V vo ¬ © 4.5m ¹ ¼ «© ¹ » kN / m 2
V 'vo ª 3 § 2.5m · º « § 11.93 · »
Plate 2: Basic Elements of SPT Borehole « 4.77kN / m * ¨ ¸» «¬ ©¨ 21.47 ¹¸ »¼
¬ © 4.5m ¹ ¼
Correction of Cn and N1 values:

The foregoing parameters were taken from SoiO3DUDPHWHUVȖȖ¶ /4.77) kN/m3 and Hi
= (2.50/4.50)m associated with Liquefaction susceptibility, of Refernce7).
Table 5: Cn and N1 DWı¶vo = 1 atm

Hi N Values ı¶ vo [atm, dN/cm2] CN N 1 Values
SPT Depths As Measured Actual effective Corrective DWı¶ v = 1 atm
in [m] No. of blows overburden pressure Factor
2.50 7 1.19 0.92 6.44
4.50 8 2.15 0.68 5.44
The expression that was taken after Liao and Whitman, 19861):
ª § 1 ·0.5 º
0.5 «¨ ¸ »
§ 1 · « © 1.19 ¹ » § 0.92 · § 7 u 0.92 · § 6.44 ·
CN 2.5 m / 4.5 m ¨ ¸ ¨ ¸ N1 NCN 2.5 m / 4.5 m ¨ ¸ ¨ ¸
© V 'v ¹ « § 1 ·0.5 » © 0.68 ¹ © 8 u 0.68 ¹ © 5.44 ¹
«¨ ¸ »
¬ © 2.15 ¹ ¼
450
N1,60 i.e. ‘Truncated Mean Value’ of N11)

Fully standardized value of N 1,60 i.e. ‘Truncated Mean Value’ of N1 remaining to Fine
Sands, the critical foundation stratum would appear as:
N1 * CR * CB * CE §H 2.5m · § 0.78 ·
N1,60 N1 * CR * CS * CB * CE , Where: CR f¨ i ¸ ¨ ¸
1 © Hi 4.5m ¹ © 0.83 ¹
1 (N1 * CR * CB * CE )
100
is correction for SPT depth, seta dire for rod length, CB f d i 131mm 1.025
is correction
for borehole diameter, isCcorrection
E for hammer energy efficiency,
1
CE f HammerType (0.7 1.2) 0.95(Remaining to 'safety hammmer type'),
2
N1,60
CS is correction for non-standardized sampler configuration, defined as: CS 1
100
That resulted to:

§ N11 * CR * CB * CE · § 6.44 * 0.78 * 1.025 * 0.95 ·
¨ 1 ¸ ¨ 1 ¸ § 4.89 ·
¨ 1 (N11 * CR * CB * CE ) ¸ ¨ 1 (6.44 * 0.78 * 1.025 * 0.95) ¸ ¨ 0.95 ¸
§ Hi 2.5m · ¨ 100 ¸ ¨ 100 ¸ § 5.15 ·
N1,60 f¨ ¸ ¨ ¸ ¨ ¸
© Hi 4.5m ¹ ¨ N12 * CR * CB * CE ¸ ¨ 5.44 * 0.83 * 1.025 * 0.95 ¸ ¨ 4.40 ¸ © 4.58 ¹
¨ ¸ ¨ ¸ ¨ ¸
¨¨ 1 1 1 © 0.96 ¹
(N12 * CR * CB * CE ¸¸ ¨ 1 (5.44 * 0.83 * 1.025 * 0.95) ¸
© 100 ¹ © 100 ¹
Evaluation of Cyclic Induced Displacements of Fine Sands
6LPSOLILHGSURFHGXUHIRUĲ max 8)
The horizontal earthquake force F acting on the soil column, which has a unit width and unit
length, is:
§W · §Jz · amax
F ma ¨ ¸ a ¨ ¸ amax V vo W max
©g ¹ © g ¹ g
where: F=horizontal earthquake force acting on soil column that has a unit width and length;
P WRWDOPDVVRIVRLOFROXPQZKLFKLVHTXDOWR:JȖ WRWDOXQLWZHLJKWRIVRLO] GHSWK
below ground surface of soil; a= the maximum horizontal acceleration at ground surface
caused by the earthquake (a = a max ı vo Ȗ]WRWDOYHUWLFDOVWUHVVDWERWWRPRIVRLOFROXPQ
since the soil element is assumed to have a unit base width and length, the maximum shear
IRUFH)LVHTXDOWRWKHPD[LPXPVKHDUVWUHVVĲ max .
Solid body as deformable soils8)

'LYLGLQJERWKVLGHVRIWKHIRUHJRLQJHTXDWLRQE\WKHYHUWLFDOHIIHFWLYHVWUHVVı vo ’ and since
soil column does not act as a rigid body during the earthquake, but rather the soil is de-
formable, Seed and Idriss (1971) incorporated a depth reduction factor r d :
451
W max § V vo · § amax · § V vo · § amax ·

¨ ¸¨ ¸ rd ¨ ¸¨ ¸
V 'vo © V 'vo ¹ © g ¹ © V 'vo ¹ © g ¹
Cyclic Stress Ratio (CSR) 8)

For the simplified method, Seed et al. (1975) converted the typical irregular earthquake
record to an equivalent series of uniforPVWUHVVF\FOHVE\DVVXPLQJWKHIROORZLQJĲ cyc =0.65
Ĳ max ZKHUHĲ max is uniform cyclic shear stress amplitude of the earthquake. By substituting
Ĳ max ı¶ vo DQG Ĳ cyc Ĳ max , the earthquake-induced cyclic stress ratio remain to be as
follows:
W cyc § V ·§ a ·
CSR 0.65rd ¨ vo ¸¨ max ¸
V 'vo © V 'vo ¹ © g ¹
ZKHUHı¶ vo =vertical effective stress, and CSR, is cyclic stress ratio (dimensionless), also
commonly referred to as seismic stress ratio. Furthermore, Cetin and Seed (2000, 2003)
proposed new empirical basis for estimation of r d as a function of: depth, earthquake
magnitude, intensity of shaking and stiffness. Under the circumstances, the uniform cyclic
shear stress amplitude r d was adopted as:
rd 1 0.001Hi
Pursuant to Reference2), the alternative basic rock acceleration
period was taken as M w =7 but, for earthquake acceleration of 200 years in which acceleration
was to be 0.29. It would be similar to acceleration of 7 1/2 . Based on the standard penetration
test and field performance data, Seed et al. (1985) concluded that there are three approximate
potential damages, ranging as follows:
Table 6: Correlation between the N1,60 and Potential Damage
N 1 , 60 Potential damage
0 - 20 High
20 - 30 Intermediate
>30 No significant damage
As it stands in the preceding table, an N 1,60 value of 20 is the approximate boundary between
the medium and dense states of the sand. Above an N 1,60 off 30, the sand is in either a dense
or a very dense state. For the condition, initial liquefaction does not produce large de-
formations because of the dilation tendency of the sand upon reversal of the cyclic shear
stress. On the other hand, the factor N 1,60 for the SPT borehole depth of 2.5m and 4.5m,
correlated with coefficient C r , C b , and C e , was given the value of 5.15 to 4.58. This is the
reason, the sends soil produce no significant damage (>30), as indicated by the above table.
Liquefaction disturbance was allocated to “Fine Sands” stratum, the plasticity limit and liquid
limit were to be 28.8% and 45%. Plasticity index was defined to be 16.2%. Here, it should
be noted that (PL) + (LL) = (PI). Greadibility of “Fine Sands” were defined to be: clay
particles 7.7% < 0.002 mm, fine particles 27.7% < 0.005 mm, and sand particles the 96.2%.
See table 2 of “Fine Sands”, for more details. According to modified Chinese Criteria1) of
Wong (1979), Seed and Idriss (1982), the Liquefaction Susceptibility Status were not
generally the subject to “classic” cyclically induced liquefaction. However, pursuant to
452
Andrews and Martin (2000)1) correlations(see table 3), the clay fines are 7.7% which is versus
max 10% is less than estimated, can be liquefaction susceptible. It is finally to see the “Fine
Sands” of FC = 27.7% can be attributed to be the boundary between the Pan-American data
and Non-Liquefaction data. See Plate 3 for more details.
Vs Susceptible Correlation
Now let as see how the stands goes with reference to Vs, the Susceptible Correlation1). Shear
wave velocity of 200 to 240 m/s, and of fines content 6–34% was according Refer-ence2)
found to be potentially liquefiable. The results of geophysical prospecting (1970) were found
to be saturated fine sands strata underlying ‘Baosic’ and ‘Tivat’ sites in Montenegro2).The
strata of deluvial, proluvial, alluvial-sea sediments and under physical change of gravel,
sands, of heterogeneous properties, deposited to watersides, were ranked under the
Reference2) . The same goes for the thickness of strata which is 5 to 15m2).
Cyclic Resistance ratio for clean and silty sands for M = 7.5 earthquakes8)
Cyclic resistance ratio (CSR) for an anticipated magnitude of 7.5 earthquake is to be
calculated once the N 1,60 value and the percent of fines in the soil, have been determined. It
is to emphasize that for magnitude of 7.5 earthquake, the clean sand will not liquefy if the
N 1,60 value exceeds 30. For an N 1,60 values off 30, the sand entering a dense or a very dense
state. As previously mentioned, dense sands will not liquefy because they tend to dilate
during shearing. The moment magnitude scale has become the more commonly used method
for determining the magnitude of large earthquakes. In this sense, Kanamori (1977) and
Hanks and Kanamori (1979) introduced the moment magnitude M w scale, in which the
magnitude is calculated from the seismic moment, using the following:
Mw 6.0 0.67log M 0 6.0 log( P Af D )(Richter Scale)
Whereof: M w =moment magnitude earthquake, M 0 VHLVPLF PRPHQW PDJQLWXGH ȝ VKHDU
modulus of material along the plane, A f =area of fault plane undergoing slip, and D=average
displacement of ruptured segment of fault.
Concerning the previous equation, it is often desirable to determine or estimate the

earthquake magnitude based on the moment magnitude M w =7 1/2 scale. This is because M w
tends to significantly deviate from the other magnitude scales at high magnitude values, and
M w appears to better represent the total energy released by very large earthquakes. Thus, for
very large earthquakes, the moment magnitude scale M w would seem to be the most
appropriate magnitude scale.
Table 7: Anticipated and Magnitude of Scaling Factor8)

Anticipated Scaling Magnitude Scaling
Factors Factor(MSF)
8 1/2 0.89
7 1/2 1.00
6 3/4 1.13
6 1.32
5 1/4 1.50
453
Thus, for a Magnitude of 7 or below, any one of these magnitude scales can be used to
determine the Magnitude scaling factor. The moment Magnitude M w tends to significantly
deviate from the other magnitude scales and the moment magnitude M w should be used to
determine the magnitude scaling factor as far as liquefaction is concerned. That is why the
MSF=1.00 for Anticipated Scaling Factors = 7 1/2 .
Now let as see how the Earthquake Hazard stands about Referance2)(1979). There was
examined probabilistic method of earthquake hazard which was used for Adriatic Coastline,
where the return period of earthquake was investigated to be between 100 and 200 years. The
return period was of M w = 7 according to Richter scale (equivalent to scale 9 of Mercalli
scale), and it was the one that was stroked the area on 15 April, 1979. The basic rock
acceleration was to be 0.21 for 500 years return period. Moreover, the alternative basic rock
acceleration period was taken as M w =7 Magnitude but for earthquake acceleration of 200
years, in which acceleration was to be 0.29. After the seismic activity was accelerated to 0.29
and an equivalent cyclic liquefaction of N 1 ZKRVHFKDOOHQJLQJOLTXHIDFWLRQRIı vo ¶ı vo
= 0.12 to 0.18, the potential of cyclic liquefaction of sands can be considerable. The structure
was foundered for 50cm2) within the sands strata as already described under Vs Susceptible
Correlation.
Safety Coefficient
The liquefaction disturbance was analyzed by virtue of the Descartes System Plot where N 1,60
is plotted to CRR. The Plots (N 1,60 -CRR) are intersected with curves of percent of fines for
35%, 15% and max 5%. As the potential damage N 1.60 of fine sands of 0 – 20 as “high”, and
of 20-30 as “intermediate”, and the fine particle of 27.7% is critical, the soil cy-cling could
be higher if M W > 7.5. See Plate 3 for more examination. The final step of the liquefaction
analysis is to calculate the factor of safety against ground shaking. If the cyclic stress ratio
caused by anticipated earthquake is greater than the cyclic resistance ratio of the in situ soil,
then liquefaction could occur during the earthquake induction. The factor of safety to trigger
liquefaction is defined as follows:
Cycluc Resistance Ratio(Soil Capacity) CRR

SF
Cyclic Stress Ratio(Soil Demand) CSR
454
Plate 3: Plot used to determine the cyclic resistance ratio for clean and silty sands for M = 7.5
Earthquakes (After Seed et al. 1985, reprinted with permission of the American Society of Civil
Engineers)
The higher the factor of safety, the more resistant is the soil to liquefaction. However, soil
that has a factor of safety slightly greater than 1.0 may still liquefy during an earthquake. For
example, if a lower layer liquefies, then the upward flow of water could induce liquefaction
of the layer that has a factor of safety slightly greater than 1.0. Engineering experience and
judgment are essential, in the final determination of whether a site has liquefaction potential.
While in concrete case, the safety factor corresponding to cyclic liquefaction of fine sands
stratum, should not be less than 1.5 i.e.:
CRR
SF d 1.5
CSR
Assuming that for N 1.60 (for H i =2.50m/4.5m)=5.15/4.58, and the same for
CSR(H i =2.5m/4.5m, assuming 0.29 as a max /g)=0.58 and the intersecting the curve of fine
sands to less than 27.7 percent of fines, we found that the cyclic resistance of in situ fine
sands at a depth of 2.5m and 4.5m is to be minimum:
CRR 0.12
SF 0.21 d 1.5
CSR (H i 2.50m ) 0.58
CRR 0.115
SF 0.20 d 1.5
CSR (H i 4.5m ) 0.58
455
Based on the factor of safety against liquefaction, it is probable that during the anticipated
earthquake of 7 1/2 in situ, the sand located at a depth of 2.5m/4.5 m below ground surface,
could be liquefiable.
ANALYSIS OF CYCLIC INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS OF FINE SANDS

BEDDING
The tentative analysis of cyclic induced displacements of permanent foundation of soil in

lateral direction, see Plate 4), was completed using both theoretical PHASE Program and the
Empirical Approach. In both of them, the input parameters have been derived on provisional
basis of the soil described in the Tables 1, 2 and 3. In general, the analysis comprehended in
(1) Static, Pre-liquefaction conditions, (2) Cyclic – Pre-liquefaction conditions, evaluation of
critical strength, and (3) Post-liquefaction conditions.
“PHASE” Program Evaluation
Characterizing Static, Pre-Liquefaction Conditions Foundation of Soil Parameters
Table 8: Comprehensive Liquefaction parameters
Fine Highly Sandy Fluvio-

Description Sands 1 Plastic Silts2 Gravel 3 Glacial 4
Sediments
Undrained
Volumetry volumetric weight 14.85 15.30 17.25 23.5
ȖN1P3)
Compressibility Modulus of
(kPa=10-2 kp/cm2) Deformability E d 15 000 10 000 69 000 90 000
(kN/m3=10-1 [kPa]
Mp/m2) 3RLVVRQ¶V5DWLRȝ 0.47 0.42 0.45 0.30
Angle of Internal
Shear Strength 29 23 32 29
)ULFWLRQĳ>GHJUHH@
Parameters
Cohesion, c[kPa] 0.0 16 0.0 125
Hydraulic
Intergranular
Conductivity, 10-4 10-8 10-3 10-3
Permeability
K[m/s]
Volumetry, Compressibility and Shear Strength Parameters, was instituted from Ref-
erence7). Intergranular Permeability was taken for similar kind of materials of Montenegro
Cost line. As far as the fine sands properties, they were assumed as: Field Stress and Body
456
0.44
Plate 4: Overloading of pipeline
Force, Elastic Isotropic Type, Mohr-Coulomb failure Criteria and Plastic Material Type.
Furthermore, they were of the unit weight=14.85kN/m3 (1.485t/m3), Yang’s
Module=15000kPa (15mPa). The Elastic Tensile Strength Criteria of 0.0, Frication Angle of
29 degree, and Cohesion (peak) of 0.0. The Plastic Material Type of: 0.0 of degree of Dilation
457
Angle, 29 degree of Frication Angle, Cohesion (residual) of 0.0. Also, they were of Gravity
Filed Stress with total ratio of 0.4 and Seismic Load Coefficient of 0.44. The soil was hit by
anticipated earthquake (M w 9, Richter).
Evaluation of Critical Strength of Post-Liquefaction Conditions of Fine Sand Bedding

The appraisals of fine sands were derived from borehole logs, the laboratory tests of soils
samples and from geophysical prospecting of Montenegro Coastline. The pipelines were of
EXULHGDOLJQPHQWFRQFUHWHOLQHGDQGRIGLDRIĭ7KHSLSHOLQHVZHUHIRUPHP-
bedded at the bottom of the lake. Crossing their axes, the pipelines extended to max 9m.
Distance of pipelines was 3.0m. The depth of pipelines, were approximately filled with multi-
grain 0.1 to 5.0mm of deposits of river aggregate sand.
The shear strength of fine sands prone to liquefaction is defined to be equivalent to cyclic
shear stress which can still be suppressed by liquefiable fine sands. The cyclic shear strength
that triggers liquefaction is defined to be yield strength.
The strength factor, according to PHASE program, is calculated by dividing the rock strength
(based on the failure criteria) by the induced stress at every point in the mesh. All three
principal stresses have an influence on the strength factor (Sigma1, Sigma 3 and Sigma Z),
so the strength factor in Phase2 can be considered 3-dimensional. In the case of Elastic
materials, the strength factor can be less than unity, since overstressing is allowed. In the case
of Plastic materials, the strength factor is always greater than or equal to unity. Since we
define Dilation Angle as 0.0 and the Yang’s Module was always 15mPa, the fine sands enter
plastic material leaving thus the yielding state just to occur. That is the edge of Physical
stability of fine sands.
Under the earthquake, the cyclic load tends to decrease volume of soil, increasing
simultaneously the soil shear stresses. The failure mechanism is then becoming activated
once the governing shear stresses have overrun the ultimate shear strength of the soil. In the
liquefaction theory, this state of soil stresses has been defined as “cyclic liquefaction/strain
softening”.
How do we take to simulate overloading structure of the fine sands? We can overload the
fine sands for approximately 0.78m above its max water level being 9.80m, thus to increase
shear stress and shear strength. See the precedent Plate 4. Whist the earthquake, the
increasingly rated shear stress became higher than shear strength. This is on the verge of the
knife of plastic state of Physical stability of fine sands.
The maximum shear stress is of 19.20 kPa what is almost equal to the shear strength of the
fine sands. Theoretically, the fine sand bedding horizontal displacements are from 8.35cm to
14.3cm (MW9, Richter scale), which could be the final displacements of fine soil.
458
19.2
Plate 5: Cyclic Stress Conditions ( ) versus Static Pre-Liquefaction Conditions ( )
Post-Liquefaction Conditions by Permanent Ground Displacement (PGD)9)
Plate 6: Cyclic Stress Conditions ( )
Plate 7: Static Pre-Liquefaction Conditions ( )

459
Post-Liquefaction Conditions by Permanent Ground Displacement (PGD)9)

Foundations Displacements for Post-Liquefaction Conditions of fine sands bedding ware to
be the Permanent Ground Displacement (PGD). Liquefaction-related PGD can be vertical,
lateral, or a combination. Only lateral PGD are discussed here. There are several methods
available for quantification of PGD, the empirical procedures is the most important one.
For free-face conditions9),2):
Log DH = -16.3658+1.1782*M W +0.9275*logR- 0.0133*R+0.6572LogW+0.3483LogT 15

+4.527*log(100-F 15 )-0.9224*D50 15
Where:
D H, is estimated post-liquefaction lateral ground displacements after cessation of earthquake,
in meters,
D50 15 =1.08, is average grain size in gradeability curve of fine sands, in millimeters,
F 15 =7.7%, is average fines content (fraction of fines passing No. 200 sieve) for Fine Sands,
in percent,
Mw=7.5, is moment magnitude of earthquake, (similar to that of Kotor town, M w =7),
R=55km, is average horizontal distance from the foundation site to the surface projection of
seismic source, in kilometers, (from territory of urban domain of municipality of Kotor town),
S=0%, is foundation slope in percent,
T 15 =5.0m, is cumulative thickness of saturated granular layers with corrected blow counts
(N 1 ) less than 15, in meters,
W = is ratio H/L, where, the H is the height of free-face, and the L is the horizontal distance
from the base of free-face to the point on the slope where the displacement is analyzed.
As it follows, the vibratory ground motions fluctuates from D h (M w 7.5)=0.175m to D h
(M w 9)=0.514m, without any pipeline entrenched to its surroundings.
Table 9: Empirical Ground Motion Displacements

Log D H (M w =7.07) 0.990487748 DH= -0.004 m
Log D H ( M w =7.5) 1.497113748 DH= 0.175 m
Log D H ( M w =8) 2.086213748 DH= 0.319 m
Log D H ( M w =8.5) 2.675313748 DH= 0.427 m
Log D H ( M w =9) 3.264413748 DH= 0.514 m
Engineered Mitigation of Liquefaction Risk
PHASE Program Mitigation Measures

The model was running for total and effective stress conditions governing the soil, wherein
the shear strength performance of the soil was gradually classic/softened, until the model has
EHFRPHXQVWDEOHLHVXSSRVHGO\OLTXHILDEOH:RYHQ*HRVLQWHWLFı!.1/m2 , k=18 l/m2/s,
serving as reinforcement of fine sands, over-lined with Non-Woven, needle punched geo-
PHPEUDQHı!.1PN [-3 l/m2/s, at the bottom of pipeline i.e. at the ground of
river aggregate sand i.e. course sands backfill, were applied.
460
Plate 8: Cyclic stress conditions with only elastic properties but without Geogrid/Geotextile
underneath the course sands backfill
Fine Sands bedding were run only with elastic stress bedding, meaning that the Elastic
Tensile Strength Criteria of 0.0, Frication Angle of 29 degree, and Cohesion (peak) of 0.0,
were included. The Plastic Material Type was beyond the analysis. Application of
geosinthetics, will still not be applied. The output of the file was to be present hereinafter.
The pipes suffer horizontally displacements for 7.65cm to 9.90 cm (Richter scale, 0.44g).
Plate 9: Embedding of pipeline below the course sands backfill
Finally, it is now to install the perspective mitigating measures of Pipelines foundation, which
comprised geosynthetically reinforced underneath the pipeline composed of Woven
Geosintetic and Non-Woven needle punched geomembrane. The pipes were under the effects
of Seismic Load Coefficient of 0.44(Mw9, Richter). The movement of the pipes was from
8.35 to 14.3cm. Foregoing Plates gives the details of.
461
24 kPa
Plate 10: ( ) Critical Stress Level associated with Cyclic Stress Conditions of Pipeline foundation
which is geosynthetically reinforced; ( ) Critical Strength Level associated with Cyclic Stress
Conditions of Fine Sands before being engineered for pipeline accommodation; ( )Permanent
post-liquefaction displacements arising out from empirical approach
Use the flexible lining such as Woven Geosintetic and Non-Woven needle punched geo-
membrane underneath the pipes in order to locally augment the shear strength of fine sands
(24kPa to 19.20kPa) to sustain the tensile forces which may be pronounced at peaks of
particular tones of soil oscillation whilst earthquake. The apex of Magnitude of PHASE is
accumulated to 9. For the reasons, flexible lining should act stabilizing the pipeline system.
Mitigation Measure by Empirical Evaluation
According to the worst case scenario, where the soil material was exposed to maximum
cyclic/softening, the horizontal movement of the pipeline arrives in a range of Dh
(M w 7.5)=0.175m to Dh (M w 9)=0.514m, of Richter Scale. Here, the mitigation measures to
sustain Dh(M w 7.5/9) displacements, should be in a way proportional to those of alleviating
measures for Phase program i.e. 8.35cm to14.3cm(M w =9), or something higher in case of
PGD Dh(M w 9) has been occurred. The succeeding Plate No.11 gives the details of.
CONCLUSIONS
This is to conclude that the section of circa 12km of Montenegro Ashore Water Supply Sys-
tem had to intersect the Skadar’s Lake beginning of intake pumping station until the pumping
station intended to drinking water is transferred to Adriatic Cost consumers. The section had
to be embedded within the fine sands stratum, the thickness of which extends to 5m on
average. According to several criteria recommended in the article, liquefaction susceptibility
was promoted to cyclical induced sends. While the Montenegro Ashore liquefaction study7)
was dealing with Wang, Seed, Idriss, Martin and R. Day, who were favoring the soils
liquefaction engineering.
462
Plate 11: Empirical Movement of the Pipelines
The liquefiable silts alias five sands, with number of blows 7 and 8 targeting N 1 =6.44 and
5.44 the hypothetical value and the truncated mean value N 1,60 which used to be 5.15 at
H i =2.5m and 4.58 at H i =4.5m, were set. Following the empirical value of r d , and basic
acceleration of fine sands of 0.29(M w =7.0 upon Richter), giving thus the CSR (Cyclic Stress
Ratio) of 0.58(H i =2.50m and H i =4.50m).
Liquefaction disturbance was plotted in Descartes system (N 1,60 to CRR), where CRR is
Cyclic Resistance Ratio. By having the fine sands plot of 27.7%, which is supposed to be
critical, the safety factor appeared to be SF= 0.21 to 0.20, which is still lesser than 1.5. The
cyclic liquefaction of fine sands looks to be certain. Cyclic induced displacement of fine
sands were derived by PHASE program and empirical approach.
Volymetry, compressibility, shear strengths and permeability, the PHASE program derived
them according to Refernece7). The seismic load coefficient was taken by PHASE program
as 0.44(M W =9, Richter). According to PHASE program, they theoretically moved fine sands
463
pipeline for 8.35 to 14.3 cm. According to Reference2), the seismic striking that affect
Montenegro in 1979, comply with number 7, magnitude (Richter scale) and a number of
structures were sank for half a meter.
Permanent Ground Acceleration (PGD) was also analyzed by free-fake conditions. There
was a formula prompted in Reference8) by which the free-face conditions were evaluated.
Accordingly, there was assumed the horizontal displacements of Dh (Mw 7.5)=0.175m, and
the same for (M w 9)=0.514m,(Richter).
Final conclusion about the general pipeline displacements founded on highly plastic sends is:
- 51.4cm, M w =9(PGD), as a greater value, or
- 14.3cm, M w =9(PHASE), as a lesser value, or
- 17.5cm, M w =7(PGD), us an intermediate value
Use of flexible lining such as Woven Geosintetic and Non-Woven needle punched geo-
membrane, underneath the pipes, in order to augment locally the shear strength of fine sands
(24kPa to 19.20kPa) as well as to sustain during the tensile forces which may be pronounced
at peaks of particular tones of soil oscillation whilst earthquake, may be beneficial to reduce
the foregoing parameters to satisfactory level. For the reasons, flexible lining should act
stabilizing the pipeline system.
REFERENCES
1. R. B. Seed, K. O. Cetin, R. E. S. Moss, A. M. Kammerer, J. Wu, J.M. Pestana, R.F. Reimer, R.B.
Sancio, J.D. Bray, R.E. Kayen and A. Faris. Earthquake Engineering Research Center -
Recent Advances in Soil Liquefaction Engineering: a Unified and Consistent Framework.
26th Annual ASCE Los Angeles geotechnical Spring Seminar. Keynote Presentation, April
30, 2003. pp from 1 to 71(009-254).
2. Mr. Kosta Talaganow and other:Institut za zemljotresno inzenjerstvo i seizmologiju na Univerzitetu
“Kiril Metodij” Skopje. Definisanje potencijala likvifakcije pjeskovitih tla na teritoriji
urbanog podrucja opstine Kotor, Crna Gora. Skopje 1981. pp 1-1 to 6.4, internal document.
3. Karl Terzaghi, Late Professor of the Practice of Civil Engineering Harvard University, Lecturer
and Research Consultant in Civil Engineering, University of Illinois. Ralph B. Peck,
Professor of Foundation Engineering, Emeritus, University of Illinois. Gholamreza Mesri,
Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois. Soil Mechanics in Engineering
Practice, Third Edition. pp 393 to 398(009 -162).
4. W.F.Chen, Editor in Chief, Handbook of Structural Engineering, 1997 by CRC Press LLC. By
Charles Scawthorn EQE, Section 5.2.7, Liquefaction and liquefaction related permanent
ground displacement. Section: 5(011 -08).
5. Dr. Fu Hua Chen, P.E. Honorary Member, ASCE, 1999. Soil Engineering: Testing, Design, and
Remediation. Paragraph 3.1.1.: Penetration Resistance Test. pp 03-36(03-188).
6. W. F. Chen, Editor in Chief, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, 1995. The Civil
Engineering Handbook, CRC Press, Boca Raton New York London Tokyo. Strength and
Deformation of Soils. pp 705 to 713(011-007).
464
7. Study of Liquefaction Potential of the strata underlying underwater pipeline section, the protective
measures inclusive of Montenegro Ashore Domestic Water Supply System. Internal
Document.
8. Robert W. Day, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Handbook, 2002. Robert W. Day is a
leading geotechnical engineer and the Chief Engineer at American Geotechnical in San
Diego. Pp 1.1 to 6.22 (009-0.47).
9. W.F. Chen, Editor in Chief, Handbook of Structural Engineering, 1997 by CRC Press LLC.
Charles Scawthorn, Earthquake Engineering. Section 5(011 -08)
465
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131.552
UTJECAJ SEIZMIKE NA FAKTOR SIGURNOSTI

KLINASTOG LOMA
-DVPLQD+DGåDMOLü*, Azra Špago**
* Interprojekt d.o.o., Maršala Tita 254a Mostar, BiH
jasmina_hadzajlic@outlook.com
** *UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW8QLYHU]LWHWD³'åHPDO%LMHGLü´0RVWDU865&³0LWKDW
Hujdur Hujka” Mostar, BiH, azra.krvavac@unmo.ba
REZIME
Analizirano je SHW VOXþDMHYD VWDELOQRVWL NOLQDVWRJ ORPD ]D VWLMHQVNL PDVLY ]DGDQLK
JHRWHKQLþNLKSDUDPHWDUD3UHGVWDYOMHQDMH]DYLVQRVWIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLRGVHL]PLþNLKXWLFDMD
KRUL]RQWDOQRJLYHUWLNDOQRJVHL]PLþNRJNRHILFLMHQWD]DSURPMHQOMLYRYHUWLNDOQRSRYUãLQVNR
RSWHUHüHQMH WH ]DYLVQRVW IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG MHGLQLþQH WHåLQH L 0RKr-Coulomb-ovih
SDUDPHWDUDVWLMHQVNRJPDVLYD]DUD]OLþLWHNRPELQDFLMHKRUL]RQWDOQLKLYHUWLNDOQLKVHL]PLþNLK
koeficijenata.
./-8ý1(5(ý,klinasti lom, Mohr-Coulomb-ov kriterij loma, faktor sigurnosti,

KRUL]RQWDOQLVHL]PLþNLNRHILFLMHQWYHUWLNDOQLVHL]PLþNLNRHILFLMHQW
EFFECT OF SEICMICS ON THE SAFETY FACTOR

OF THE WEDGE FAILURE
ABSTRACT
Five cases of the rock wedge stability with given geotechnical parameters were analyzed.
The dependence of the seismic effects (horizontal and vertical seismic coefficients) for
variable vertical surface loading is presented, as well as the dependence of the safety factor
on the unit weight and Mohr-Coulomb rock mass parameters for different combination of
horizontal and vertical seismic coefficients.
KEY WORDS: wedge failure, Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria, horizontal seismic

coefficient, vertical seismic coefficient
UVOD
Analiza stabilnosti kosine LPD]QDþDMQXSULPMHQXNRGUD]OLþLWLKREMHNDWDNDRãWRVXzgrade,

mostovi, brane, autoceste, željeznice i rudnici. (Yan, 2015.)
Kod gotovo svih kosina neizbježna je degradacija uslijed prirodnog procesa trošenja i
WUDQVSRUWDPDWHULMDODQL]LVWX1DYHüLQLNRVLQDWRMHNRQWLQXLUDQLYUORVSRULSURFHV1HND
466
NOL]DQMDVHGRJDÿDMXNDRL]QHQDGQLGRJDÿDMQDNRVLQDPDNRMHVXSULMHWRJDGXJo bile stabilne.

(www.rudar.rgn.hr )
Najvažniji faktori klizanja su:

a) geološki uslovi na kosini (litologija, struktura, stepen trošnosti)
b) geomorfološki procesi (nagib kosine, orijentacija, reljef)
c) slojevi materijala tla / stijene (dubina, propusnost, poroznost)
d) hidrološki i antropogeni procesi (promjene u težini materijala, korištenje zemljišta).
6HOE\MHIDNWRUHNRMLXWMHþXQDNOL]DQMHNODVLILFLUDRXGYLMHRVQRYQHVNXSLQHIDNWRUL
NRML SULGRQRVH SRYHüDQMX VPLþXüLK QDSUH]DQMD VPDQMHQMH LOL SRYHüDQMH RSWHUHüHQMD QD
NRVLQL SRYHüDQMH YROXPHQD JOLQD WURãHQMH SRYHüDQMH QDJLED NRVLQD VDWXUDFLMD XVOLMHG
SDGDYLQD L IDNWRUL NRML SULGRQRVH VQLåHQMX VPLþXüH þYUVWRüH VODERVW PDWHULMDOD IL]LþNH L
hemijske reakcije, promjene u strukturi, pukotine).
.OLPDWVNL XVORYL QD EURMQH QDþLQH GMHOXMX QD VWDELOQRVW NRVLQD 3DGDYLQH NDR MHGDQ RG
QDMþHãüLKPRJXX]URNRYDWLSRNUHWDQMHNOL]DQMDXNROLNRVHSRUQLSULWLVDNSRYHüDGRNULWLþQH
YULMHGQRVWL8NODQMDQMHYHJHWDFLMHWDNRÿHUPLMenja hidrološke i hidrogeološke uslove kosine
i može uzrokovati ubrzano otjecanje vode niz kosinu, a time eroziju materijala i dovesti do
SRYHüDQH YMHURMDWQRVWL QDVWDQND NOL]LãWD L EODWQLK WRNRYD 9DUQHV, 1978.). U planinskim
SRGUXþMLPD V YHüLP NROLþLQDPD VQLMHJD WRSOMHQMH VQLMHJD X SUROMHüH MH MHGDQ RG JODYQLK
LQLFLMDWRUD NOL]DQMD 3RYHüDQMH WHåLQH PDWHULMDOD QD SDGLQL PRåH ELWL SRVOMHGLFD SULURGQLK
SRMDYD LOL OMXGVNH DNWLYQRVWLãWR PRåH X]URNRYDWL SUHRSWHUHüHQMH YUKDNRVLQH L GRYHVWLGR
loma. Ostali vanMVNL þLPEHQLFL SRMDYH QHVWDELOQRVWL VX SRWUHVL L XGDUQH YLEUDFLMH 2QL NRG
JUDQXOLUDQLK WDOD X]URNXMX SRYHüDQMH YDQMVNLK QDSUH]DQMD DOL L VPDQMHQMH SRUD þLPH VH
SRYHüDYDMX SRUQL SULWLVFL ãWR L]D]LYD VPDQMHQMH VPLþXüH þYUVWRüH PDWHULMDOD 1D UD]YRM
nestabilQRVWLXWMHþHLGXåLQDGMHORYDQMDQHSRYROMQLKþLPEHQLNDWHFLNOLþNDRSWHUHüHQMDNRMD
postepeno oslabljuju materijal. 'XJRQMLü--RYDQþHYLü
KLINASTI LOM
Na slici 1. su prikazani modeli loma stijenske mase koja se ponaša kao ekvivalentni
kontinuum (lijevo), i kada se stijenska masa ponaša kao diskontinuum (desno).
Slika 1. Modeli nestabilnosti stijenske mase

Figure 1 Rock mass instability models
467
/RP NRVLQD QDVWXSD SR MHGQRP RG QDYHGHQH GYD PRGHOD 0HÿXWLP SRVWRML L VOXþDM NDGD
SORKD ORPD SUROD]L GMHORPLþQR NUR] VWLMHQVNX PDVX NRMD VH SRQDãD NDR HNYLYDOHQWQL
NRQWLQXXPDGMHORPLþQRVOLMHGLSORKXSORKHGLVNRQWLQXLWHWD9HüLQDORPRYDXWOXGHãDYD
VHSRPRGHOXNRMLRSLVXMHORPNRQWLQXXPDGRNMHYHüLQDNOL]DQMDXVWLMHQVNRMPDVLSRVOMHGLFD
nepovoljne orijentacije diskontinuiteta. U stijenskoj masi ploha loma uglavnom prati
GLVNRQWLQXLWHWH SRãWR MHQMLKRYD þYUVWRüD QHXSRUHGLYR QLåD RG þYUVWRüH LQWDNWQe stijene. U
PHGLMX NRML VH SRQDãD NDR KRPRJHQL NRQWLQXXP SORKD ORPD SUROD]L NUR] WRþNH QDMYHüHJ
VPLþXüHJQDSUH]DQMDRGQRVQRQDMPDQMHVPLþXüHþYUVWRüH8VWLMHQVNRMPDVLNRMDVHSRQDãD
NDRGLVNRQWLQXXPSORKDORPDVOLMHGLPMHVWDQDMPDQMHVPLþXüHþYUVWRüH (Vrkljan)
1DMþHãüLWLSRYLORPDXVWLMHQVNRMPDVLVXUDYQLNOLQDVWLURWDFLMVNLORPLORPSUHYUWDQMHP
'XJRQMLü--RYDQþHYLü
3UHPD +RHN L %UD\ NOLQDVWL ORP MH QDMþHãüH ]DVWXSOMHQL ORP X VWLMHQVNRM PDVL
Klinasti lom se pojavljuje u stijenskoj masi duž dva diskontinuiteta koji se nalaze pod
RGUHÿHQLPXJORPRGQRVXQDOLFHNRVLQHWHVHIRUPLUDNOL]QRWLMHORNRMHNOL]LSUHPDLVNRSX
SR SUHVMHFLãWX UDYQLQD WLK GLVNRQWLQXLWHWD 0RåH VH SRMDYLWL VD LOL EH] SULVXVWYD YODþQH
pukotine. Da bi se dogodio UDYQLORPWUHEDMXELWL]DGRYROMHQLVOMHGHüLJHRPHWULMVNLXVORYL
a) nagib linije presjecišta dvije klizne ravni mora biti manji od nagiba lica kosine
b) QDJLE OLQLMH SUHVMHFLãWD GYLMH NOL]QH UDYQL PRUD ELWL YHüL RG SURVMHþQRg ugla
unutrašnjeg trenja stijenske mase. (www.grad.unizg.hr)
Na slikama 2. i 3. su prikazani pogled i SRSUHþQLSUHVMHN VDRGJRYDUDMXüLPR]QDNDPD.
Slika 2,OXVWUDWLYQLSRJOHGQDNOLQDVWLORPOLMHYRLSRSUHþQLSUHVMHNNOLQDWHåLQH:(desno)

Figure 2. Three-dimentional view of the wedge slope (left) and cross-section of wedge showing
resolution of wedge weight W (right)
468
Slika 3. Sile generalisane na plohama diskontinuiteta i vertikalna komponenta klina (lijevo);

definicija uglova na klinastom lomu W (desno)
Figure 3. View of wedge looking at face showing definition of angles ȕ and ȟ (left) and cross-section
of wedge showing angles
NUMERIýKI PRIMJER
.UR]QXPHULþNLSULPMHUELWüHSUHGVWDYOMHQDDQDOL]DVWDELOQRVWLNOLQDVWRJORPD]DVWLMHQVNL
PDVLY3URUDþXQüH biti proveGHQXSURJUDPVNRPSDNHWX*(2=DSURUDþXQüHVHNRULVWLWL
NODVLþQL SULVWXS VD IDNWRURP VLJXUQRVWL AQDOL]LUDMX üH VH RSWHUHüHQMD RG YODVWLWH WHåLQH
GRGDWQRJVWDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDQDYUKXNRVLQHXWLFDMYRGHLVHL]PLNH
Program GEO5 uzima u obzir uticaje seizmike i to u obliku horizontalne k h i vertikalne
komponente ubrzanja k v )DNWRU XEU]DQMD MH EH]GLPHQ]LRQDOQD YHOLþLQD NRMD SUHGVWDYOMD
VHL]PLþNRXEU]DQMHNDRGLRJUDYLWDFLRQRJXEU]DQMD6HL]PLþNDVLODXYLMHNGMHOXMHXWHåLãWX
NOLQD1DMþHãüHVHX]LPDMXXRE]LUX]LPDVDPRKRUL]RQWDOQDNRPSRQHQWDXEU]DQMD0HÿXWLP
program dozvoljava i unos vertikalne komponente. (www.finesoftware.eu)
U radu je uzeta u obzir i vertikalna komponenta ubrzanja koja ima vrijednost od 1/3 do 1
horizontale komponente ubrzanja na istom mjestu. 0HãWURYLü
6LOH NRMH GMHOXMX QD NRVLQX YODVWLWD WHåLQD GRGDWQR RSWHUHüHQMH VLOD RG VLGUHQMD VH
rastavljaju na dva pravca, okomito na površine diskontinuiteta N1 i N2 i u njihovom pravcu.
)DNWRUVLJXUQRVWLVHRGUHÿXMHQDRVQRYXL]UD]D
ୡ୅ା ൛ൣ୛൫ୡ୭ୱந౦ ି୩౞ ୱ୧୬ந౦ ±୩౬ ୡ୭ୱந౦ ൯ା ୕ୡ୭ୱந౦ ି୩౞ ୕ୱ୧୬ந౦ ା୩౬ ୕ୡ୭ୱந౦ ൧஛ି୙ൟ୲ୟ୬஍
FS= (1)
(୛ା୕)ൣ(ଵ±୩౬ )ୱ୧୬ந౦ ା୩౞ ୡ୭ୱந౦ ൧
6PLþXüDþYUVWRüHVHRGUHÿXMHSUHPDMHGQRPRGNULWHULMD0RKU-Coulomb-ov, Hoek-Brown-
ov, Barton-Bandis-ovo kriterij. (www.finesoftware.eu)
.UR]9VOXþDMHYDUD]PDWUDWüHVHHIHNDWVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDN h i k v na faktor sigurnosti.
6/8ý$-,
8 VOXþDMX , UD]PDWUD VH ]DYLVQRVW IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG NRQWLQXLUDQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD T L

VHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDXKRUL]RQWDOQRPLYHUWLNDOQRPSUDYFX, što je prikazano na slici 4.
Na slici 4. (lijevo) vertikalno kontinuiraQRRSWHUHüHQMHVHPLMHQMDXUDVSRQXRGGRkN/m2.
469
Koeficijent kh ima vrijednosti 0, 0.05, 0.10, 0.25 i 0.50, što odgovara 8, 9, 10 i 11

VWHSHQX0&6=DRYDMVOXþDMYHUWLNDOQLVHL]PLþNLNRHILFLMHQWNv je konstantan i iznosi 0.
6OLND6OXþDM,
Figure 4. Case I
Na slici 4. (desno) YHUWLNDOQR NRQWLQXLUDQR RSWHUHüHQMH VHPLMHQMD X UDVSRQXRG GR

kN/m2, a ostali parametri su isti kao na dijagramu slike 4. (lijevo)
6/8ý$-,,
8 VOXþDMX ,, UD]PDWUD VH ]DYLVQRVW IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG NRQWLQXLUDQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD T L
VHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDXKRUL]RQWDOQRPLYHUWLNDOQRPSUDYFX, što je prikazano na slici 5. Na
slici 5.(lijevo) vHUWLNDOQR NRQWLQXLUDQR RSWHUHüHQMH VH PLMHQMD X UDVSRQX RG GR kN/m2.
Koeficijent kv ima vrijednosti: -0.10, -=DRYDMVOXþDMKRUL]RQWDOQL
VHL]PLþNLNRHILFLMHQWNh je konstantan i iznosi 0.10.
Slika 56OXþDM,,
Figure 5. Case II
Na slici 5. (desno) YHUWLNDOQR NRQWLQXLUDQR RSWHUHüHQMH VHPLMHQMD X UDVSRQXRG GR

kN/m2, a ostali parametri su isti kao na dijagramu slike 5. (lijevo)
470
SLUČAJ III
8 VOXþDMX ,,, UD]PDWUD VH ]DYLVQRVW IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG ]DSUHPLQVNH WHåLQH VWLMHQH Ȗ L
NRPELQDFLMHVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDXKRUL]RQWDOQRPLYHUWLNDOQRPSUDYFX, što je prikazano
na slici 6. Zapreminska težina se mijenja u rasponu od 26 do 28 kN/m3. Vrijednosti
koeficijenta k h su 0; 0.05; 0.10 i 0.25, dok su vrijednosti k v uzete negativne.
Slika 66OXþDM,,,
Figure 6. Case III
6/8ý$-,V
U VOXþDMX,9UD]PDWUDVH]DYLVQRVWIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLRGNRKH]LMHF1 diskontinuiteta sa jedne

VWUDQH SRYUãLQH NOLQDVWRJ ORPD L NRPELQDFLMH VHL]PLþNLK NRHILFLMHQDWD X KRUL]RQWDOQRP
L vertikalnom pravcu, što je prikazano na slici 7. Kohezija se mijenja u rasponu od 80 do
120 kN/m2.RPELQDFLMHVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDVXLGHQWLþQHNDRXVOXþDMX,,,
Slika 76OXþDM,9
Figure 7. Case IV
471
6/8ý$-V
8 VOXþDMX 9 UD]PDWUD VH ]DYLVQRVW IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG XJOD XQXWUDãQMHJ WUHQMD ĳ 1
GLVNRQWLQXLWHWD VD MHGQH VWUDQH SRYUãLQH NOLQDVWRJ ORPD L NRPELQDFLMH VHL]PLþNLK
koeficijenata u horizontalnom i vertikalnom pravcu, što je prikazano na slici 8. Ugao se
PLMHQMDXUDVSRQXRGGR.RPELQDFLMHVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDVXLGHQWLþQHNDR u
VOXþDMX,,,
Slika 86OXþDM9
Figure 8. Case V
=$./-8ý$.
Analizirana je stabilnost klinastog loma za stijenski masiv zadanLKJHRWHKQLþNLKSDUDPHWDUD

3UHGVWDYOMHQDMH]DYLVQRVWVHL]PLþNLKXWLFDMDQDIDNWRUVLJXUQRVWLL]Dpromjenljivo vertikalno
SRYUãLQVNRRSWHUHüHQMH]DSUHPLQVNXWHåLQXL0RKU-Coulomb-ove parametre. Preostali ulazni
SDUDPHWUL VX LVWL ]D VYH SULND]DQH VOXþDMHYH NDNR EL VH GHILQLVDOD ]DYLVQRVW SUHWKRGQR
navedenih varijabli.
=DSUYLVOXþDMPLMHQMDORVHYHUWLNDOQRRSWHUHüHQMHLKRUL]RQWDOQLVHL]PLþNLNRHILFLMHQWGRNMH
YHUWLNDOQL LPDR YULMHGQRVW 'RND]DQR MH GD VH VD SRYHüDQMHP YHUWLNDOQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD L
VHL]PLþNLKVLODXKRUL]RQWDOQRPSUDYFXVPDQMXMHIDNWRUVLJXUQRVWL)6.ULYHVDGLMDJUDPDQD
slici 4. su iVWRJREOLND]DUD]OLþLWHYULMHGQRVWLN h . Faktor sigurnosti brže opada za interval
YHUWLNDOQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD RG GR N1P2 GRN VD SRYHüDQMHP YHUWLNDOQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD
VPDQMHQMH IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL VSRULMH L SULPMHüXMH VH GRPLQDQWQLML XWLFDM YHUWLNDOQRJ
opterHüHQMD X RGQRVX QD VHL]PLþNH XWLFDMH QD IDNWRU VLJXUQRVWL 5D]ORJ MH X WRPH ãWR VD
SRYHüDQMHPYHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDVLOHRWSRUDUDVWXEUåHQHJRDNWLYQHVLOH]ERJUD]ODJDQMD
istih u dva pravca.
Na dijagramu na slici 4. (desno) je prikazana zavisnost izPHÿX IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL RG
RSWHUHüHQMDNRMLVHSRYHüDYDGRN1P2 LVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWD,]RYRJGLMDJUDPDVH
YLGLGDMHRSDGDQMHIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLSULSRYHüDQMXYHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDGRN1P2
sve sporije te faktori sigurnosti za q = 500 kN/m2 ]DVYHYULMHGQRVWLVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWD
472
SULEOLåQRL]QRVH'DOMLPSRYHüDYDQMHPRSWHUHüHQMDGRN1P2 faktor sigurnosti se

SULEOLåDYD YULMHGQRVWL L WHN SUL WDNR YHOLNRP RSWHUHüHQMX L ]D ]DGDWH JHRPHKDQLþNH
parametre stijenskog masiva kosine prelazi u nestabilno stanje.
1DUHGQLVOXþDMMHDQDOL]LUDR]DYLVQRVWYHUWLNDOQRJVHL]PLþNRJNRHILFLMHQWDLIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWL
SULSRUDVWXYHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMD3RãWRVPMHUVHL]PLþNHVLOHXYHUWLNDOQRPSUavcu može
LüLXREDVPMHUDGRND]DQRMHGDMHNRVLQDQDMQHVLJXUQLMDNDGDYULMHGQRVWN v ima negativan
SUHG]QDN )DNWRU VLJXUQRVWL EUåH RSDGD VD SRUDVWRP VHL]PLþNLK XWLFDMD L YHUWLNDOQRJ
RSWHUHüHQMD SUL þHPX MH SDG X LQWHUYDOX RG GR N1P2 brži, dok sa SRYHüDYDQMHP
YHUWLNDOQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD VPDQMHQMH IDNWRUD VLJXUQRVWL VSRULMH L SULPMHüXMH VH GRPLQDQWQLML
XWLFDMYHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDXRGQRVXQDVHL]PLþNHXWLFDMHQDIDNWRUVLJXUQRVWL5D]ORJMH
XWRPHãWRVDSRYHüDYDQMHPYHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDVLOHRWSRra rastu brže nego aktivne sile,
zbog razlaganja istih u oba pravca. TDNRÿHU LQWHUHVDQWQR MH LVWDüL GD NDNR YULMHGQRVW
YHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDUDVWHIDNWRULVLJXUQRVWL]DUD]OLþLWHYULMHGQRVWLN v VHL]MHGQDþDYDMX
što je vidljivo sa dijagrama na slici 5. (desno) Dakle, uticaj seizmike postaje indiferentan na
IDNWRU VLJXUQRVWL NDGD VH SRYHüDYD YULMHGQRVW RSWHUHüHQMD ãWR MH REMDãQMHQR X VOXþDMX ,
'DNOHRSDGDQMHIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLSULSRYHüDQMXYHUWLNDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMDGRN1P2 je
sve sporije te faktori sigurnosti za q = 500 kN/m2 ]D YULMHGQRVWL VHL]PLþNLK NRHILFLMHQDWD
SULEOLåQRL]QRVH'DOMLPSRYHüDYDQMHPRSWHUHüHQMDGRN1P2 faktor sigurnosti se
SULEOLåDYD YULMHGQRVWL L WHN SUL WDNR YHOLNRP RSWHUHüHQMX L ]D ]DGDWH JHRPHKDQLþNH
parametre stijenskog masiva kosine prelazi u nestabilno stanje.
=D]DGQMDWULVOXþDMDNRPELQDFLMHVHL]PLþNLKNRHILFLMHQDWDVXLVWH
9ULMHGQRVWIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWLVDSRUDVWRP]DSUHPLQVNHWHåLQHVWLMHQHL VHL]PLþNRJXWLFDMD
RSDGD 3UDYD MH LVWRJ REOLND ]D UD]OLþLWH Nombinacije VHL]PLþNLK NRHILFLMHQDWD 'RELYHQH
zavisnosti za sve kombinacije su linearne, što se može objasniti þLQMHQLFRP GD SURPMHQD
zapreminske težine ima isti uticaj na aktivne i pasivne sile.
8SRVOMHGQMDGYDVOXþDMDYDULUDOLVXVHMohr-Coulomb-ov parametri c 1 Lĳ 1 , gdje je dokazana
OLQHDUQD]DYLVQRVWL]PHÿXQDYHGHQLPSDUDPHWDUDLIDNWRUDVLJXUQRVWL/LQHDUQD]DYLVQRVWVH
objašnjava Mohr-Coulomb-RYLP NULWHULMHP þYUVWRüH QD SDUDPHWUH VWLMHQVNRJ PDVLYD
8RþHQRMHGDQDIDNWRUVLJXUQRVWi ima manji uticaj ugao unutrašnjeg trenja nego kohezija, što
se objašnjava dominantnijom ulogom kohezije kao SDUDPHWUDþYUVWRüHQDVPLFDQMHXRGQRVX
na trenje.
LITERATURA:
'XJRQMLü-RYDQþHYLü6,QåHQMHUVNDPHKDQLNDVWLMHQD*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW6YHXþLOLãWDX5LMHFL
skripta
0HãWURYLü'3RWUHVQRLQåHQMHUVWYR*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW6YHXþLOLãWDX=DJUHEX
9UNOMDQ,,QåHQMHUVNDPHKDQLNDVWLMHQD*UDÿHYLQVNLIDNXOWHW6YHXþLOLãWDX5LMHFL
Yan, K.: Wedge failure analysis of anchored rock slopes subjected to surcharge and seismic loads,
Edith Cowan University, 2015.
www.rudar.rgn.hr
www.grad.unizg.hr
www.finesoftware.eu
473
Pregledni rad
UDK 625.7/.8
$6(,=0,ý.2352-(.7291$-(2%-(.$7$
NISKOGRADNJE
Dragan Zlatkov, 6ODYNR=UDYNRYLü1LNROD-DQNRYLü

*UDÿHYLQVNR-arhitektonski fakultet Univerziteta u Nišu, ul. Al. Medvedeva 14, Niš.
enpedokle@gmail.com, slavko.zdravkovic@gaf.ni.ac.rs,
dragan.zlatkov@gmail.com)
REZIME:
8UDGXVHXND]XMHQDLQWHUDNFLMXVDREUDüDMQLFDLWHUHQDãWRL]LVNXMHVYHREXKYDWQRSR]QDYDQMH
tla. To je iz razloga što se objekti niskogradnje, tj. trase tih objekata su neprekidne, dužine
stotine i stotine kilometara pa se prostiru kroz raznorodna tla pa formiranje trase treba
DGHNYDWQRSULODJRGLWLWLPXVORYLPDãWRQLMHQLPDORODNRLMHGQRVWDYQR)RUPLUDQMHGLQDPLþNL
PDWHPDWLþNLPRGHOQDNRMLVHQDþLQVHGHILQLãXRGJRYDUDMXüLXVORYLWODLNRQVWUXNFLMH3UHPD
Evrokodu 8 se objašnjava primena projektnog spektra odgovora na rešavanje ovih vrlo
složenih prirodnih fenomena.
.OMXþQHUHþLsDREUDüDMQLFDWORWUDVDGLQDPLþNLPRGHOkanalizacija, nasip.
ASEIZMIC DESIGN OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

STRUCTURES
ABSTRACT:
The paper deals with the interaction of roads and terrain, which requires a comprehensive
knowledge of the soil. This is because civil engineering structures, ie. the routes of these
structures are continuous, with hundreds and hundreds of kilometers in length, and extend
through heterogeneous soil so that the formation of the route should be adapted to these
conditions, which is not easy and simple. Formation of a dynamic (mathematical model) in
which the appropriate soil and construction conditions are defined.
Eurocode 8 explains the application of the project response spectrum to address these very
complex natural phenomena.
KEYWORDS: road, soil, route, dynamic model, sewer, embankment.
UVOD
2EMHNWLQLVNRJUDGQMHVXVYLRQLREMHNWLNRMLVXQDMYHüLPGHORPVXGELQVNLYH]DQL]DWORNDR
ãWRVX3XWHYLåHOH]QLFHDHURGURPLWMVYLVDREUDüDMQLREMHNWL2E]LURPGDVHRYLREMHNWL
uglavnom moraju biti u nekom vidu oslonjeni na tlo, to u objekte niskogradnje svakako ne
spadaju objekti visokogradnje iako temeljima oslanjaju na tlo jer njihovo relevantno
ponašanje nije dominantno vezano za tlo. Pri ovome se ne misli na elementarne nepogode
474
koje su uglavnom u vezi sa tlom pa u mnogome pogoršavaju i ponašanje objekata

visokogradnje. I bez mnogo filozofiranja jasno je kada se kaže objekat „niskogradnje“ na
NRMH VH VYH REMHNWH RYDM L]UD] RGQRVL ,QWHUDNFLMD VDREUDüDMQLFD L WHUHQD L]LVNXMH RVQRYQH
faktore koje uslovljavaju koncept tUXSD VDREUDüDMQLFH QDVLSD L XVHND EURM L YHOLþLQD
YHãWDþNLK L JHRWHKQLþNLK REMHNDWD 3UL YRÿHQMX VDREUDüDMQLFH QDMYHüX RSDVQRVW GD EXGH
XJURåHQDSRWLþHRGNOL]LãWDSDLKWUHEDSRVYDNXFHQXL]EHJDYDWLMHUQMLKRYDVDQDFLMDGRVWD
košta a i nije pouzdana LãWRMHQDMJRUHYUORWHãNRLKMHL]EHüLRE]LURPGDGXåYRÿHQMDWUDVH
þHVWRQDLOD]LPRQDDNWLYQDLSDVLYQDNOL]LãWDþLMHL]EHJDYDQMHWM]DRELODåHQMHQLMHQLPDOR
MHGQRVWDYQRDSRQHNDGMHJRWRYRLQHPRJXüHRE]LURPGDPQRJRNRãWDL]PHãWDQMHWUDVHL
nije MHGQRVWDYQRMHUMHSRYH]DQRVDPQRJLPWHãNRüDPD'DMHWDRSHUDFLMDMHGQRVWDYQDLODND
RQGDELWUDVDYHüELODYRÿHQDWLPSUDYFHPDQHQDUD]LþQLPPHVWLPDNOL]LãWD=QDþLGDUL]LN
L ãWHWD RG NOL]LãWD LPDMX VYRMVWYR QHRGUHÿHQRVWL MHU ]D QMLKRYR UHãDYDQMH QLVu unapred
SUHGYLÿHQDILQDQVLMVNDVUHGVWYDNRMDQLXNRPVOXþDMXQLVXEH]QDþDMQDLPDODYHüQDSURWLY
1DMMHGQRVWDYQLMH MH XQDSUHG LPDWL LOL XUDGLWL UHJLVWDU NOL]LãWD VD RVQRYQLP JHRWHKQLþNLP
SRGDFLPDXSRGUXþMXSURYODþHQMDWUDVHNRMHQHVDPRSRGXåLQLYHüLSRãLULQLQLMHPDORSD
MHRSDVQRVWXWROLNRYHüD
0(72'2/2*,-$,=8ý$9$1-$387$1-(75$6(,*(27(+1,ý.$
ISTRAŽIVANJA
6HL]PLþQRVWWHUHQDSURMHNWDQWXPRUDELWLSR]QDWD1DRVQRYXWRJVD]QDQMDSURMHNWDQWGRQRVL
odluku o merama sanacije, kao i njihovom obimu i dimenzijama ukoliko postoji potreba za
WLP=QDþLGDMHMHGQDRGELWQLKNDUDNWHULVWLNDWHUHQDVHL]PLþQRVWWMRVRELQDWHUHQDGDMHYLãH
LOL PDQMH RWSRUDQ QD GHMVWYR ]HPOMRWUHVD 3UHPD VDGDãQMLP QDXþQLP VD]QDQMLPD R
]HPOMRWUHVLPD QHPRJXüH LK MH SUHGYLGHWL SUHPD PHVWX YUHPHQX MDþLQL L NDNYH üH ãWHWH
izazvati.
*HRWHKQLþNL SUHGKRGQL UDGRYL SRGORJH ]DVQLYDMX VH QD SURMHNWX LVWUDåQLK UDGRYD
Rešava se raspored masa (iskop – nasip – deponije – pozajmište), odvodnjavanje podužno i
SRSUHþQR WLSVNH JUDÿHYLQVNH JHRWHKQLþNH NRQVWUXNFLMH SRWSRUQL ]LGRYL REORåQL ]LGRYi,
GUHQDåH JUDÿHYLQVNH NRQVWUXNFLMH PRVWRYL YLMDGXNWL WXQHOL QDGYRåQMDFL L]PHãWDQMH
YRGRWRNDLVOLþQR
Idejni projekat je podloga za investicioni program, odnosno Studiju opravdanosti
SURUDþXQ X JUDQLFDPD - 10%, poželjno, pa sadrži opise radova SUHGPHUH L SURUDþXQ
VWDWLþNHLKLGUDXOLþNLSURUDþXQGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMHNDRLGRND]QLFHNROLþLQDSUHVHNHRVQRYH
L VO ]D SRWUHEH JODYQRJ SURMHNWD VDREUDüDMQH NRQVWUXNFLMH SURSXVWL PHOLRUDFLMH WHUHQD
sidrenje i dr.). Na primer: Glavni projekat obuhvata detaljnu inženjersku razradu svih
elemenata puta i putnih objekata (mostovi, tuneli, potporne i zaštitne konstrukcije i sl.)
QHRSKRGQH ]D IL]LþNX UHDOL]DFLMX SXWD X UHDOQRP SURVWRUX 2YDM SURMHNDW REXKYDWD L
kompleksno razrešenje infrastukturnih sistema u zoni zahvata radova, otpimizaciju metoda i
SRVWXSDND JUDÿHQMD RGYRGQMDYDQMH SRYUãLQVNLK SULEUHåQLK L SRG]HPQLK YRGD UD]UDGX
L]YRULãWD PDWHULMDOD XUHÿHQMH SURVWRUD X ]RQL SXWD VDREUDüDMQR-WHKQLþNX RSUHPX SUDWHüH
sadržaje (funkcionalne i za potrebe korisnika), eksproprijaciju i dr. U okviru ove faze
SURMHNWRYDQMDGHILQLãHVHSUHFL]DQSUHGPHULSUHGUDþXQUDGRYDNRMLüHSRVOXåLWL]DOLFLWDFLRQX
proceduru i realizaciju radova, saglasno zakonskoj regulativi. Glavni projekat se radi na
osnovu detaljnih gHRWHKQLþNLK KLGURWHKQLþNLK JHRGHWVNLK L VDREUDüDMQLK VQLPDQMD L
475
podataka. U ovoj fazi rada mogu se vršiti samo mikro pomeranja osnovne trase iz Idejnog
SURMHNWDVDFLOMHPRSWLPL]DFRLMHUDGRYD6DVWDYQLGHR*ODYQRJSURMHNWDþLQHLWHKQLþNLXVORYL
]DL]YRÿenje svih vrsta radova. Osnovna razmera Glavnog projekta za puteve van naselja je
1:1000 (500), odnosno za puteve u naselju 1:500 (250).
*ODYQL SURMHNDW L]UDÿXMH VH ]D SRWUHEH L]GDYDQMD JUDÿHYLQVNH GR]YROH L ]D JUDÿHQMH
objekta i sadrži:
x detaljne inženjersko-geološke-JHRWHKQLþNHXVORYHL]JUDGQMHREMHNWDVDRVRELQDPD
VHL]PLþNLKNDUDNWHULVWLND
x UD]UDGXWHKQLþNR-tehnoloških karakteristika objekta sa opremom i instalcijama;
x SURUDþXQ JUDÿHYLQVNLK NRVQWUXNFLMD VWDELOQRVWL L VLJXUQRVWL REMHNDWD SUL GHMVWvu
VHL]PLþNLKVLOD
x podatke potrebnih geodetskih radova;
x UHãHQMHWHPHOMHQMDREMHNWDVDVSHNWDFLNOLþQRJRSWHUHüHQMD
x WHKQLþNRUHãHQMHLQIUDVWXNWXUHVDQDþLQRPSULNOMXþHQMDLXUHÿHQMDVORERGQLKSRYUãLQD
x uslove zaštite objekta i susednih objekata;
x WHKQLþNR-tehnološka i organizaciona rešenja za izgradnju objekta;
x situacioni plan;
x UD]UDGXPHUD]DVSUHþDYDQMHLOLVPDQMHQMHQHJDWLYQLKXWLFDMDQDåLYRWQXVUHGLQX
x troškove izgradnje i održavanje objekta;
x druge projekte, elaborate i podatke zavisno od namene objekta.
POMERANJA I NAPONI U TLU NASIPA – ',1$0,ý.,02'(/
7UXSSXWDåHOH]QLþNHSUXJHLOLKLGURWHKQLþNRJQDVLSDLPDREOLNWUDSH]D6OLND.RGSXWHYD
QLåHJUDQJDåHOH]QLþNLKSUXJDLKLGURWHþQLþNLKQDVLSDGHORYLQDVLSD$)%L'(&XRGQRVX
na deo BCFE su približno isti.
6OLND6NLFD]RQHVWDELOQRVWLQDVLSDLPRJXüQRVWSRMDYHNOL]QLKVORMHYDVDGLQDPLþNLPPRGHORP
'LIHUHQFLMDOQHMHGQDþLQHVLVWHPDSULND]DQRJQD6OLFLLPDMHGQDþLQH
‫ܝܕ‬ሷ ‫ ܉‬+ ‫ܝ܋‬ሶ + ‫ = ܝܓ‬૙,
‫ܝ‬ሷ ‫ܝ = ܉‬ሷ ܏ + ‫ܝ‬ሷ
pa je:
‫ܕ‬൫‫ܝ‬ሷ ܏ + ‫ܝ‬ሷ ൯ + ‫ܝ܋‬ሷ + ‫ = ܝܓ‬૙,
‫ܝܕ‬ሷ + ‫ܝ܋‬ሶ + ‫ = ܝܓ‬െ‫ܝܕ‬ሷ ܏ .
476
gde je: m-koncentrisana masa, c-prigušenje, k-krutost, u-pomeranje, ü-ubrzanje, ú-brzina,

üg –ubrzanje tla.
'HOMHQMHP MHGQDþLQD PDVRP P GRELMD VH QMHQ XRELþDMHQL REOLN X GLQDPLFL
konstrukcija:
‫ܝ‬ሷ + ૛૆૑‫ܝ‬ሶ + ૑૛ ‫ = ܝ‬െ‫ܝ‬ሷ ܏
gde je:
‫ܓ‬
૑ = ට - kružna frekvencija neprigušenih oscilacija;
‫ܕ‬
‫܋‬
૆= - relativno prigušenje;
૛‫ܕ‬૑
૑ ૚ ‫ܓ‬ ૚
܎= = ට = – frekvencija sopstvenih oscilacija, broj oscilacija u sekundi;
૛ૈ ૑ૈ ‫ܕ‬ ‫܂‬
૚ ૛ૈ
‫ = = ܂‬- perioda sopstvenih oscilacija, vreme potrebno da se izvrši cela oscilacija.
܎ ૑
5HãHQMHMHGQDþLQHVHGRELMDXREOLNXW]Y'XKDPHORYRJLQWHJUDOD
૚ ‫ܜ‬
‫׬ = )ܜ(ܝ‬૙ ‫ܝ‬ሷ ܏ (ૌ)‫૆ି܍‬૑(‫ିܜ‬ૌ)‫܌‬ૌ .
૑‫܌‬
JGHMHȦG– NUXåQDIUHNYHQFLMDSULJXãHQLKRVFLODFLMDȦG§Ȧ
Izostavljen je znak „-“, jer on pri analizi zemljotresnih uticajDQLMHRG]QDþDMD
Primer spektra odgovora prikazan je na Slici 1a, a na Slici 1b prikazan je spektar odgovora
u tripartitnom-kombinovanom logaritamskom obliku, iz koga se dobija:
‫( ܌܁‬૑, ૆) = |‫ ܠ܉ܕ|ܝ‬- spektralno pomeranje (maksimalno relativno pomeranje),
‫( ܌܁‬૑, ૆) = |‫ܝ‬ሶ |‫ – ܠ܉ܕ‬spektralna brzina (maksimalna relativna brzina),
‫( ܉܁‬૑, ૆) = ห‫ܝ‬ሷ + ‫ܝ‬ሷ ܏ ห‫ – ܠ܉ܕ‬spektralno ubrzanje (maksimalno apsolutno ili ukupno
ubrzanje).
Slika 1a Spektar odgovora
PROJEKTNI SPEKTRI
.DUDNWHULVWLNH ]HPOMRWUHVQRJ RSWHUHüHQMD ]D SRWUHEH SURMHNWRYDQMD QDMþHãüH VH ]DGDMX X

REOLNX SURMHNWQRJ VSHNWUD ,SDN WUHED LPDWL X YLGX GD VX X SURMHWQLP VSHNWULPD þHVWR
XNOMXþHQH L QHNH NDUDNWHULVWLNH SRQDãDQMD NRQVWUXNFLMH 2QR ãWR QD SUYL SRJOHG UD]OLkuje
477
projektni spektar od spektra odgovora je njegova zaobljenost, jer se amplitude spektra realnih
DNFHOHURJUDPDþHVWRELWQRPHQMDMXVDPDOLPSURPHQDPDSHULRGD2GUHÿLYDQMHVYRMVWYHQLK
perioda konstrukcije nije toliko sigurno da bi se opravdale osetne promene projektnog
RSWHUHüHQMD ]DWR SURMHNWQL VSHNWUL 6OLND F RGUDåDYDMX SURVHþQH YUHGQRVWL YLãH VSHNWDUD
RGJRYRUDDGDMXVHXREOLNXVSHNWUDSVHXGRXEU]DQMDGDELVHGLUHNWQRRGUHGLORRSWHUHüHQMHX
YLGXVHL]PLþNLKVLODSULPHQRPVWDWLVWLþNLKPHWRGD3RãWR ]HPOMRWUHVLPDNDUDNWHUVHOXþDMQRJ
LNUDNWRWUDMQRJRSWHUHüHQMDWRVHSULGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMXNRQVWUXNFLMHX]LPDMXPDOLNRHILFLMHQWL
VLJXUQRVWL 7UHED SULKYDWLWL þLQMHQLFX GD VH WRNRP GHORYDQMD MDNLK ]HPOMRWUHVD QDSUH]DQMD
konstruktivnih elemenata približavaju QMLKRYRMJUDQLþQRMQRVLYRVWLDNRGSRMHGLQLKGHORYD
NRQVWUXNFLMHRQDPRåHELWLGRVWLJQXWDLSUHNRUDþHQD.RGQRVHüLKNRQVWUXNFLMDRGEHWRQDL
þHNLNDLOLELORNRJGUXJRJPDWHULMDODWR]QDþLQHOLQHDUQRSRQDãDQMHLOLRGJRYRUNRQVWUXNFLMH
u nelinearnom podrXþMXSRQDãDQMDPDWHULMDODLXWRPHMHUD]OLNDL]PHÿXVWDOQRJRSWHUHüHQMD
LNRPELQDFLMHXRELþDMHQLKRSWHUHüHQMDLGHORYDQMD]HPOMRWUHVD.RGVHL]PLþNRJRGJRYRUDRG
SUHVXGQRJ MH ]QDþDMD SRX]GDQR QHOLQHDUQR SRQDãDQMH NRQVWUXNFLMH =HPOMRWUHV L]D]LYD
FLNOLþQRnaprezanje u konstrukciji.
'XNWLOQR SRQDãDQMH MH RGQRV L]PHÿX HODVWR-SODVWLþQH L PDNVLPDOQH OLQHDUQR-HODVWLþQH
GHIRUPDFLMH=DSURUDþXQLGLPHQ]LRQLVDQMHWDNYLKNRQVWUXNFLMDNRULVWHVHSURMHWQLVSHNWUL
þLMHVXRUGLQDWH]QDQWRPDQMHQHJRNRGHODVWLþQLKVSHNWDUDMHUX]LPDMXXRE]LUPRJXüQRVWL
QHOLQHDUQRJUDGDNRQVWUXNFLMHLGLVLSDFLMHHQHUJLMHXQHVHQH]HPOMRWUHVRP6OLNDF(ODVWLþQL
spektri ubrzanja (Slike 1b i 1c) direktno se mogu koristiti za dimenzionisanje krutih
konstrukcija. Pošto sve konstrukcije XJUDÿHYLQDUVWYXSRVHGXMXL]YHVQXVSRVREQRVWGXNWLOQRJ
SRQDãDQMDWRNRULãüHQMHPHODVWLþQRJVSHNWUDVPRQDVWUDQLVLJXUQRVWLDOLLNRQ]HUYDWLYL]PD
Slika 1b Tripartitni spektar odgovora u logaritamskom obliku (Newmark, Hall) za zemljotres El

Centro za prigušenje od 2%.
478
Slika 1c Projektni spektzar odgovora
.ODVLþDQSULVWXSVNDOLUDQMXSRPRüXPDNVLPDOQRJXEU]DQMDQHPRåHGDWLWUDåHQHVSHNWUH]D
SURMHNWRYDQMHNRML]DGRYROMDYDMXSULQFLSHRþHNLYDQRJSRQDãDQMDNRQVWUXNFLMHYHüSURMHNWQL
VSHNWUL RGUHÿHQL PHWRGRP XQLIRUPQRJ KD]DUGD =D UDFLRQDOQR SURMHNWRYDQMH VHL]PLþNL
RWSRUQLK NRQVWUXNFLMD SRWUHEQR MH NRULVWLWL SRVWXSNH SURUDþXQD NRML RPRJXüXMX GRYROMQR
GREDU XYLG X YHOLþLQH VYLK VHL]PLþNLK ]DKWHYD-krutost, nosivost, duktilnost i disipaciju
energije.
KATEGORIZACIJA OBJEKATA DUŽ TRASE NA DEJSTVO ZEMLJOTRESA
.DWHJRUL]DFRLMDREMHNDWDX]HPOMRWUHVQRPLQåHQMHUVWYXSUHGVWDYOMDYHRPD]QDþDMDQIDNWRUDOL
VH VYLP REMHNWLPD QH SRVYHüXMH GXåQDSDåQMD 2EMHNWLPDåHOH]QLþNLKSUXJD NDR L GUXJLP
REMHNWLPD QLVNRJUDGQMH ]DYUHPH GHMVWYD ]HPOMRWUHVD QLMHSRVYHüHQDRGJRYDUDMXüa pažnja
NDRREMHNWLPDYLVRNRJUDGQMHNDNRNRGQDVWDNRLXVYHWX1DãMRãXYHNYDåHüLXRYRP
GHOXSULYUHPHQLSUDYLOQLN]DPRVWRYHGDMHVDPRMHGDQL]UD]RGGYHYHOLþLQHLQDYRGLNRMH
mere treba preduzeti kod izgradnje vodovoda i kanalizacija. Druge ukopane objekte i
åHOH]QLþNHSUXJHLQHSRPLQMHQDSULPHUVDREUDüDMQLFDåHOH]QLþNDSUXJD%HRJUDG– Bar, ima
NDWHJRULMX,UHGDãWR]QDþLGDWUHEDGDRþXYDVYRMXIXQNFLMX]DYUHPHLSRVOHMDNLKSRWUHVD
NRMLPDPRåHELWLL]ORåHQDMHUSUROD]LNUR]UD]OLþLWHVeizmološke zone. Seizmiloška karta sa
SRYUDWQLPSHULRGRPRGJRGLQDNRMDVHRGQRVLQDRELþQHREMHNWH,,L,,,NDWHJRULMHQH
SUXåDDGHNYDWQXVLJXUQRVWRYRPVDREUDüDMQRPSUDYFXNDRQLREMHNWLPDNRMLVXXIXQNFLML
trase. Zato je data i karta sa povratnim SHULRGRPRGJRGLQD,VWRYDåLL]DåHOH]QLþNL
VDREUDüDMQLSUDYDF%HRJUDG-1LãLDXWRSXWHYH=QDþDMQHãWHWHQDREMHNWLPDQLVNRJUDGQMHMH
bilo za vreme zemljotresa na Crnogorskom primorju od 15.04.1979. Dok je duž mora zemlja
pucala i tonula, u brdima kXGDSUROD]LåHOH]QLþNDSUXJDLPDJLVWUDODUXãLODVHNDPHQDODYLQD
479
NRMD MH ORPLOD ãLQH QRVLOD HOHNWULþQH VWXERYH REDUDMD YLMDGXNWH 'HWDOML V SXWD L SUXJH
L]PHÿX7LWRJUDGDL%DUD6OLND
Slika 2a vijadukt 6OLNDEåHOH]QLþNDVWDQLFD
=$./-8ý$.
Prilikom izgradnje objekata niskogradnje koji se mogu svrstati u važne objekte, pri njihovoj
L]JUDGQMLPRUDVHSUHGKRGQRGHILQLVDWLNRHILFLMHQWVHL]PLþNRJLQWHQ]LWHWDLGUXJLparametri
PLNURUHMRQL]DFLMH.RULVWHüLVHL]PLþNXPLNURUHMRQL]DFLMXSRVWLåHVHEH]EHGQRJUDÿHQMHNRMH
se suprotstavlja razornom dejstvu zemljotresa, jer se odvija na osnovu raspoloživih seizmo-
VWDWLþNLK JHRPRUIRORãNLK JHRORãNLK LQåHQMHUVNR-geoloških i hidrogeoloških podataka.
6HL]PLþNL UL]LN QLMH ]DYLVWDQ VDPR RG VHL]PLþNH ORNDFLMH L HNRQRPVNL SULKYDWOMLYRJ
NULWHULMXPD]DãWLWHYHüLRGWLSDNRQVWUXNFLMHLJUDÿHYLQVNRJPDWHULMDOD6HL]PLþNLKD]DUGMH
QDMYDåQLMLHOHPHQWVHL]PLþNRJUL]LNDMHUSUHGVWDYOMDYHURYDWQRüXSRMDYOMLYDQMD]HPOMRWHUVD
RGUHÿHQLK NDUDNWHULVWLND 6HL]PLþNL UL]LN GHILQLãH VH NDR RþHNLYDQL VWHSHQ JXELWDND
SURX]URNRYDQLK HIHNWLPD EXGXüLK ]HPOMRWUHVD L RãWHüHQMHP REMHNDWD NDR L SRYUHGDPD L
gubitcima ljudskih života. Primenom dodatne sigurnosWL REH]EHÿXMHPR VH RG VRFLMDOQLK
SRVOHGLFD XVOHG IXQNFLRQDOQLK RãWHüHQMD LOL ORPD 1H WUHED LVNOMXþLWL QL UHJXODWLYX NRMD VH
RGQRVLQD]DãWLWXåLYRWQHVUHGLQHMHUVHWHUHWQLPVDREUDüDMHPþHVWRSUHYR]HRSDVQLWHUHWL
Treba napomenuti da postoje prirodni i tehnogeni uticaji koji dovode do novih ili
DNWLYLUDQMD SRVHEQR ]D YUHPH ]HPOMRWUHVD XPLUHQLK JHRORãNLK L JHRGLQDPLþNLK SRMDYD L
SRWUHVD 2G SULURGQLK VX QDMþHãüL NOL]LãWD RGURQL QHVWDELOQL VLSDUL L QHUDYQRPHUQD
NRQVROLGDFLMDWODDRGYHãWDþNLKNOL]DQja, osipanja i odlamanja u zonama useka, preduseka,
SRUWDODWXQHODLGU,PDMXüLXYLGX(YURNRGNDWHJRUL]DFLMDSUDNWLþQRSUXåDPRJXüQRVWGDVH
EROMH RVWYDUL NRQWUROLVDQD SRYUHGOMLYRVW WHKQLþNR-tehnoloških sistema. Ovde se pre svega
misli na sve vrlo važne objekte na trasi kao što su: mostovi, vijadukti, tuneli, propusti,
SRWSRUQL]LGRYLQDVLSLXVHFLREMHNWLYLVRNRJUDGQMHLGUXJLNDRMHGLQLþQLVWYRUHQLREMHNWL
480
Zahvalnica:
Ovo istraživanja je sprovedeno na *UDÿHYLQVNR-arhitektonskom fakultetu Univerziteta u Nišu
u okviru projekta iz oblasti tehnološkog razvoja u periodu 2011.-2019. god. pod nazivom
„Eksperimentalna i teorijska istraživanja linijskih i površinskih sistema sa polukrutim
vezama sa aspekta teorije II reda i stabilnosti“ (TR 36016), finansiranih od strane
Ministarstva prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja Republike Srbije.
LITERATURA
>@7-RYDQRYLü61HGHOMNRYLü50LOHQNRYLü.DWHJRUL]DFLMDXQLVNRJUDGQML]HPOMRWUHVQLDVSHNW
DGKS simpozijum, Zlatibor, 2008, str.379-384.
>@%6LNRãHN00DQRMORYLü=HPOMRWUHVL3ROLWLNDEU%HRJUDGVWU-63.
[3] T. Paskalov, Zemljotresi,(Crna Gora, 7.19h, 15.04.1979., Pobjeda, Titograd), Beograd, 2008.
>@3UDYLOQLNRWHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DL]JUDGQMXREMHNDWDYLVRNRJUDGQMHXVHL]PLþNLPSRGUXþMLPD
Službeni list SFRJ, br. 31/38 i dopuna br.52/90, Beograd, 1990.
>@3UDYLOQLNRSULYUHPHQLPWHKQLþNLPSURSLVLPD]DJUDÿHQMHXVHL]PLþNLPSRGUXþMLPD6OOLVW6)5-
br 39/ 64, Beograd, 1964.
>@1DFUW3UDYLOQLNDRWHKQLþNLPQRUPDWLYLPD]DSURMHNWRYDQMHLSURUDþXQLQåHQMHUVNLKREMHNDWDX
VHL]PLþNLPSRGUXþMLPD=DYRG]DVWDQGDUGL]DFLMXEU-97/96, Beograd, 1987.
>@(YURNRG(&3URMHNWRYDQMHVHL]PLþNLRWSRUQLKNRQVWUXNFLMD'HR L'HR*UDÿHYLQVNL
IDNXOWHW%HRJUDGXUHGQLN5)ROLü
>@'/XNLü3$QDJQRVWL*HRWHKQLNDVDREUDüDMQLFD%HRJUDG
>@6=GUDYNRYLü'LQDPLNDNRQVWUXNFLMDVD]HPOMRWUHVQLPLQåHQMHUVWYRP*UDÿHYLQVNR-arhitektonski
fakultet Univerziteta u Nišu i AGM knjiga, Beograd,2017.
>@5)ROLü'=HQXQRYLü³'XUDELOLW\'HVLJQRI&RQFUHWH6WUXFWXUHV-part 2: Modeling and
Structural Assessment”, Facta Univerzitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering,
University of Nis, Vol 8, No1, 2010, pp. 45-66.
>@6=GUDYNRYLü%0ODGHQRYLü'7XUQLü.DWHJRUL]DFLMDLEH]EHGQRVWåHOH]QLþNHSUXJHL
REMHNDWDGXåWUDVHQDGHMVWYR]HPOMRWUHVD=ERUQLNUDGRYD*UDÿHYLQVNR-arhitektonskog fakulteta,
Niš, 2011, broj 26, str. 155-164.
481
UDK 624.042.7
THE INFLUENCE OF ɌHE SOIL MECHANICAL

PROPERTIES ON THE SEISMIC DESIGN
PARAMETERS
Toni Kitanovski, Vlatko Sheshov, Kemal Edip,

Julijana Bojadjieva, Jordanka Chaneva, Dejan Ivanovki

tonik@iziis.ukim.edu.mk
ABSTRACT
Definition of the seismic design parameters is one of the most common type of project worked
on in the Department for geotechnics and special structures which is part of the Institute of
Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology. Unfortunately, often there are
situations when all the steps from the defined program are not possible to be performed
because of time-consumption or limited financing. Direct simple shear apparatus experiments
for defining the shear stress-strain relationship are normally the first one to be omitted and
leaves the engineer in a situation where he is forced to use literature found backbone curves.
KEY WORDS: Seismic design parameters, DSS experiments, backbone curves
87,&$-MEHANIČKIH692-67$9$7/$1$
3$5$0(75(6(,=0,ý.2*352-(.7OVA1M$
REZIME
Definicija VHL]PLþNLKSDUDPHWDUDSURMHNWRYDQMDMHGDQMHRGQDMþHãüLKWLSRYDSURMHNDWDNRMLVH
rade na Odeljenju za geotehniku i specijalne konstrukcije, a koje je deo Instituta za
]HPOMRWUHVQRLQåHQMHUVWYRLLQåHQMHUVNXVHL]PRORJLMX1DåDORVWþHVWRSRVWRMHVLWXDFLMH kada
QLMHPRJXüHL]YHVWLVYHNRUDNHL]GHILQLVDQRJSURJUDPD]ERJXWURãNDYUHPHQDLOLRJUDQLþHQRJ
ILQDQVLUDQMD 'LUHNWQL MHGQRVWDYQL HNVSHULPHQWL XUHÿDMD ]D VPLFDQMH ]D GHILQLVDQMH RGQRVD
QDSUH]DQMDVPLFDQMDLQDSUH]DQMDRELþQRVXSUYLNRMLVHL]RVWDYOMDMX i inženjera ostavlja u
situaciji kada je primoran da krive napon-deformacija preuzima iz literature.
./-8ý1(5(ý,6HL]PLþNLSDUDPHWULGL]DMQD'66HNVSHULPHQWLNULYHQDSRQ-deformacija
INTRODUCTION
Determination of the seismic site potential and definition of the seismic design parameters is
obligatory according to Macedonian building regulations for high importance class
structures. The problem with the regulations is that they don’t prescribe a concise procedure
482
for obtaining these parameters or even regulate the minimum requirements. The Institute of
Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology, has prepared detailed procedure that
involves definition of expected earthquake effect through a probabilistic approach, detailed
geophysical survey, laboratory experiments on soil samples, analysis of the local soil effects
through nonlinear dynamic analysis of representative geotechnical models and estimating the
seismic input parameters. Unfortunately, in most cases because of financing problems and
time-consumption the laboratory experiments for the definition of shear modulus and
damping ratios of the local soil are omitted and for defining the mechanical properties of the
soil backbone curve from the literature are used. In this paper, through two case studies it
will be shown that with good knowledge of the local soil material the backbone curves from
the literature can be used with satisfactory results.
METHODOLOGY
The methodology used for defining the local seismic design parameters starts with
observance of the seismic history for the location and represents a good starting point to
determine the subsoil properties for potential future earthquakes. Expected seismic events are
derived from the influence of local and distant earthquakes, and then the expected maximum
accelerations at bedrocks (PGA) are calculated by using attenuation as functions and
presented for a return period of 50, 100, 200, 500 and 1000 years.
Figure 1. Epicentral map for N. Macedonia (1900-2010)
The next step are the geological and geophysical investigations performed to define the
characteristics of the media on the investigated site that have an influence on the modification
of regional seismic effect, for example: Vp and Vs – seismic velocities, the thickness of the
layers and depth of bed rock. During the geophysical investigation, soil samples can be taken
and brought to the laboratory for soil dynamics for testing. In order to define the shear
modulus and damping ratio dependent on the shear strain direct simple shear (DSS) apparatus
is used, which is part of the laboratory for soil dynamics in IZIIS. This device applies
dynamic excitation in the form of shear strains in the horizontal direction through a central
loading plate placed between the two cylindrical shape soil models. The models are with a
483
diameter of 6.1cm and height that can vary from 1.5cm up to 2cm, placed between three
loading plates and restrained in the vertical direction. In multiple steps, shear amplitudes are
applied to range from 10-4 % up to 5% resulting in hysteresis loops that represent the shear
stress-strain relationship.
Figure 2. Shear stress–strain relationship
The effects of the local soil conditions is determined by analysis of the response of
mathematical models of soil. Therefore geodynamic models are defined, representing the soil
medium of the location. Analyses are carried out by applying the method of vertical
propagation of shear seismic waves through a linear-visco-elastic system. Time histories of
acceleration for multiple earthquakes that are critical in terms of predominant periods for that
location are used with scaled maximum acceleration that corresponds to the site seismicity.
Peak acceleration along the depth of the model is observed, along with elastic response
spectra for chosen layers.
CASE STUDIES
The two cases presented in this paper represent diametrically opposite site of the problem. In
“Case study 1” a very scarce geotechnical survey was done with insufficient results and no
soil samples were taken, which normally means that there were no laboratory experiments
done. The first 18m of the soil medium were defined as sand, then 8m of gravel with a seismic
bedrock placed at depth of 26m. Having previous experience with the sandy soil from that
region helped us choose a curve from the literature in the process of modeling the soil
medium. In this case the average curve for sand from Seed and Idriss (1970) was the most
suitable one for the first layer of 16m. For conformation of the model an additional one was
made using two curves, one for the shallow and other for the deeper layers, defined from
previous research on sand samples from the region. The results from both models for
maximum acceleration along the depth were compared.
484
Figure 3. Peak acceleration along the depth – Case study 1
Good correlations of the results can be observed, especially in the top or foundation layers,
which are usually of interest. Acceleration amplification of 58% on the top, or 55% on
foundation level is obtained. In the case of elastic response spectra for the surface both
models present significant amplification that needs to be avoided in the future building
project. The difference that can be noticed is the small shift of the peak in the results. While
model 1 shows much clearer and higher peak for periods of around 0.5s the second model
has lower but wider peak for periods from 0.25-0.5s, with the biggest difference of results in
the range of 60% for periods of around 0.3s.
Figure 4. Elastic response spectra – Case study 1
In the “Case study 2” a geotechnical survey previously was conducted with more than 20
boreholes from which soil samples were taken. The whole soil medium was compiled of clay
with low plasticity, with the seismic bedrock defined at depth of 20m. For the laboratory
experiments six characteristic boreholes were chosen, with samples taken from two depth
levels, first one ranging from 4 to 8m and samples from depth of 11.5 to 14m. While
preforming the DSS test two levels of effective pressure was applied corresponding to the
sampling depth
485
Figure 5. Backbone curves – Case study 2
From the DSS test results it was clear that we are working with homogeneous soil medium
along the whole building site and it was decided that for the analysis in these paper there is
no need of making multiple models in terms of different backbone curves. Again like in the
previous case, the model was divided in two parts in term of depth using average curves for
the two levels of effective pressures. For comparison of the results another model was
designed with shear modulus and damping curves chosen to be most fitting from the
literature, in these case the curves by Seed and Idriss proposed for clays upper range (1972).
From the graph of maximum acceleration along the depth can be noticed that both models
have similar accelerations values with the biggest difference (6%) arising at the top layer, but
at foundation level the difference in acceleration is irrelevant.
Figure 6. Peak acceleration along the depth – Case study 2

486
From the elastic response spectra for the surface level can observed that there is excellent
correspondence in the results with the note that the second model has increased peak by
around 20% for periods of 0.11s. Predominant periods with the maximum amplification of
the ground motion for both models are in the range of 0.06 to 0.25s.
Figure 7. Elastic response spectra – Case study 2
CONCLUSIONS
The amplification of the bedrock acceleration in the presented two cases once again
demonstrate the importance for definition of the seismic design parameters. The local soil
conditions have huge influence on the amplification of the acceleration and in situations when
the knowledge for the mechanical properties of the soil are limited for the engineer it is
important to be able to rely on previous experience. In these paper we have manage to show
that even in state with no laboratory experiments well-chosen backbone curves from the
literature can produce acceptable results.
REFERENCES:
Seed H.B. Idriss I.M. (1970),”Soil Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Response Analysis”,
Earthquake Engineering research center, Report no.70-10
Dames & Moore (1981),”Manual for the Operation of the Cyclic Sample Shear Apparatus”, Dames &
Moore, “The Times”, 123 Northlake High Street, London
J. Bojadjieva (2015), “Dynamic behavior of saturated cohesionless soils based on element and 1-G
experiments” PhD Thesis University Ss. Cyril and Methodius-Skopje, Macedonia
T. Kitanovski (2017). “Evaluation of seismic design parameters for schools in Macedonia”, Young
Engineers Colloquium Bochum 2017
487
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.131(4)
STANJE NAUKE I PRAKSE U OBLASTI

DINAMIKE TLA I ZEMLJOTRESNO-
*(27(+1,ý.2*,1ä(1-(56TVA U SRBIJI I
REGIONU
äHOMNRäXJLü*, 'XãDQ%HULVDYOMHYLü**=RUDQ%HULVDYOMHYLü**
* Inovaconi centar Mašinskog Fakulteta, Univerzitet u Beogradu
zzugic@gmail.com
** Departman za Geotehniku, Rudarsko geološki fakultet, Univerzitet u
Beogradu,
REZIME:
U radu su prikazani osnovni postulati dinamike tla i zemljotresnog JHRWHKQLþNRJLQåHQMHUVWYD.
IstaknXW]QDþDMLVWUDåQLK JHRWHKQLþNLKradova. Dat prikaz postupka izrade GLQDPLþNRJPRGHOD
tla kao i analiza interakcije tla i konstrukcije. Objašnjeni su i benefiti NRULüüHQMD
SUREDELOLVWLþNRJSULVtXSDX]HPOMRWUHVQRPJHRWHKQLþNRPLQåHQMHUVWYX
KLJUý1(5(ý,: =HPOMRWUHVQRJHRWHKQLþNRLQåHQMHUVWYRGLQDPLNDWODSUREDELOLVWLþNL
pristup
STATE OF THE SCIENCE AND PRACTICE OF

SOIL DYNAMIC AND EARTHQUAKE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING IN SERBIA
AND REGION
ABSTRACT
In this paper, basic posutulates of soil dynamic and eartquake geotechnical engineering has
been shown. The importance of soil investiation works has been accentuated. The construciton
of soil dynamic model as weel as soil structure interaction model has been explained. The
justification of benefits of using probabilistic approach is given.
KEY WORDS: Earthquake geotechnical engineering, soil dynamics, probabilstic aproach
UVOD
GHRWHKQLþNR]HPOMRWUHVQRLQåHQMHUVWYRSUHGVWDYOMDYHRPD]QDþDMQXREODVWSULSURMHNWRYDQMX
L L]JUDGQML REMHNDWD X VHL]PLþNL DNWLYQLP SRGUXþMLPD 7HRULMVNL FLOM MH UD]XPHWL VWDWLþNR L
GLQDPLþNRSRQDãDnje sistema objekat i tlo, a zadatak inženjera je projektovati i izvesti siguran
488
objekat na sigurnoj lokaciji, zato se i razdvajaju termini dinamike tla i zemljotresnog

JHRWHKQLþNRJ LQåHQMHUVWYD SR LVWRP SULQFLSX NDR ãWR VH UD]GYDMDMX REODVWL PHKDQLNH WOD i
JHRWHKQLþNRJLQåHQMHUVWYD
.DRMHGDQRGQDMYHüLKRNLGDþD]DUD]YRM]HPOMRWresne geotehnike se može smatrati zemljotres

u Meksiko VLWLMXJRGLQH8RþHQRMHGDVXPDNVLPDOQDXEU]DQMDQDRVQRYQRMVWHQL]D
vreme zemljotresa znatno ampifikovala, tj. pRND]DQR MH GD SRVWRML þYUVWD YH]D L]PHÿX
ORNDOQLKXVORYDWODLVWHSHQDRãWHüHQMDQDREMHNWLPD
8 SRVHGQMH YUHPH SRVWRML VWDY RGUHÿHQH JUXSH HNVSHUDWD GD VH GLQDPLND NRQVWUXNFLMD L
dinamika tla u smislu analize objekata ne mogu posmatrati odvojeno, stoga X VWUXþQRM
literaturi sve þHãüH možemo videti sintagmu “dinamika tla i konstrukcija”.
=1$ý$-,675$ä1,+5$'29$
9LEUDFLMH WOD GRJDÿDMX VH QHSRVUHGQR LVSRG REMHNWD QD QLYRX IXQGDPHQWD WDNR VH
KRUL]RQWDOQDXEU]DQMDSUHQRVHQDVDPREMHNDWJHQHULãXüLVHL]PLþNHVLOHNRMHVXLQHUFLMDOQRJ
karaktera i proizvod su mase i ubrzanja tla.
1D HODVWLþDQ RGJRYRU NRQVWUXNFLMH SUL GHMVWYX ]HPOMRWUHVD QDMYHüL XWLFDM LPDMX VRSVWYHQD
SHULRGDRVFLORYDQMDLSULJXãHQMH3ULGHMVWYXMDþLK]HPOMRWUHVDGRSXãWDVHGDNRQVWUXNFLMD]DÿH
LXSODVWLþQXREODVWãWR]DVRERPQRVLLRGUHÿHQHVWHSHQHRãWHüHQMD, dok se XYHüLQLVOXþDMHYH
ne analizira da li je došlo do plasifikacije tla i koje su posledice od toka tokom i nakon
zemljotresa. Da li je došlo do plastifikacije i do kog nivoa ponajviše zavisi od konstututivnog
modela tla koji koristimo u našoj analizi.
7DNRÿH, frekventni sastav vibracije lokalog WOD MH YHRPD ELWDQ SRGDWDN D NDUDNWHULVWLþQD
perioda lokacije zavisi od sastava tla. 1DMSURVWLMDIRUPXOD]DRGUHÿLYDQMHSHULRGHMHGQRJVORMD
tla je formula (1) koju je definisao (Kramer 1996):
ܶ = 4‫ܪ‬/ܸ‫ݏ‬ (1)
.DNRELVHãWRSUHFL]LMHRGUHGLOLGLQDPLþNLSDUDPHWULWODQHRSKRGQRMHVSURYHVWLDGHNYDWQD
JHRWHKQLþNDLJHRIL]LþNDLVWUDÿLYDQMD1DåDORVWWHRULMDGLQDPLNHWODMHSULOLþQRNRPSOHNVQDL
QLMHEOLVNDYHüLQLLQåHQMHUD1DVUHüX, postoji literatura Srbulov (2011) gde je ova tematika
SRMHGQRVWDYOMHQD L NUR] SULPHUH REMDãQMHQD X FLOMX SUDNWLþQH XSRWUHEH X NRQNUHtnim
projektima.
2E]LURP GD MH DXWRU NQMLJH þRYHN VUSVNRJ SURUHNOD NRML živi i radi u Engleskoj vredi
napomenuti da je upravo u studiji sprovedenoj u Velikoj Britaniji pokazano je da blizu 60%
L]YRÿDþD MH LPDOR WHãNRüD X UHDOL]DFLML SURMHNDWD XJODYQRP ]ERJ QHGRYROMQH LVWUDåHQRVWL
terena, što je uzrokovalo znatna kašnjenja, velika poskupljenja radova i dr.
U okviru namenske studije koja je sprovedena pre nekoliko godina, vršena je analiza troškova
koji su ostvareni tokom izgradnje pojedinih objekata.
489
8YLGRP X SURMHNWQX GRNXPHQWDFLMX L]YHGHQLK REMHNDWD X RNYLUX VWXGLMH R JHRWHKQLþNLP

LVWUDåLYDQMLPD ]DNOMXþHQR MHGD MH SUL L]YRÿHQMX objekata u vrednosti 40 miliona funti, na
JHRWHKQLþND LVWUDåLYDQMD XWRUãHQR RNR IXQWL ãWR SUHGVWDYOMD XNXSQR
ugovorene sume za navedene objekte. ,PDMXüL X YLGX SUHSRUXþHQH YUHGQRVWL XWURãND
VUHGVWDYD]DJHRWHKQLþNDLVWUDåLYDQMDNRMHL]QRVHRNR-3% lako je ustanoviti potencijal za
velike propuste.
'DOMRPDQDOL]RPQDYHGHQHSURMHNWQHGRNXPHQWDFLMH]DNOMXþXMHVHGDMHEOL]XL]YRÿDþD
LPDOR WHãNRüa u realizaciji projekata uglavnom zbog nedovoljne istraženosti terena, što je
uzrokovalo znatna kašnjenja, veliko poskupljenje radova i negativan imidž pojedinih
NRPSDQLMDXMDYQRVWL1DåDORVWRYDNYLKVOLþQLKSULPHUDELORMH]QDWQRYLãHXSURãORVWLDi
danas se dešava, na našem prostoru.
O eksploatacionom periodu i “performansu” na seizmiþNHSREXGHGDQHJRYRULPR MHU üH

PQRJLREMHNWLNRMLVXL]JUDÿHQLLNRMHVDGJUDGLPR, tek doživeti test vremena LVXRþDYDQMDVD
GLQDPLþNRPSREXGRP
Dovoljno je pomeniti kosine na koridorima 10 i 11 od kojih je dobar broj u stanju labilne

UDYQRWHåHDLPDMXüLXYLGXVHL]PLþQRVWWLKGHORYD6UELMHVYDNDNRVHPRJXRþHNLYDWLYHüL
potresi u eksploatacionom veku potpornih i zaštitnih kosntrukcija.
Da se ovako QHãWR QH EL GHãDYDOR X SUDNVL V RE]LURP QD ]QDþDM JHRWHKQLNH X SURFHVX
planiranja, SURMHNWRYDQMD L L]JUDGQMH VYDNRJ REMHNWD JHRWHKQLþND LVWUDåLYDQMD WUHED
obavezno, da prethode svakoj fazi – nivou planiranja i projektnih aktivnosti, odnosno oni
þLQHVDVWDYQLGHRWHKQLþNHGRNXPHQWDFLMH$L]YRGHVHSR programu (metodologija, vrsta i
obim), u zavisnosti od projektantskih ciljeva i zadataka, složenosti problema koji treba rešiti,
kategorije i ranga objekta, faze – nivoa projektovanja i dr. – uz poštovanje osnovnih principa
LVWUDåLYDQMDSRVWXSQRVWLSRWSXQRVWLUDYQRPHUQRVWLLHNRQRPLþQRVWL
Kada govorimo o dinamiþNLP SDUDPHWULPD WOD QHRSKRGQLP QD SULPHU ]D za potrebe

VHL]PLþNHPLNURUHRQL]DFLMHYHOLNLMHSUREOHPãWRVHXYHüLQLVOXþDMHYDSDUDPHWULWODNRji se
NRULVWH ]D IXQGLUDQMHREMHNDWD X YHüLQL VOXþDMHYD QD HPSLULMVNL QDþLQ GRYRGHX UHODFLMX VD
GLQDPLþNLPSDUDPHWULPDWODQHRSKRGQLP]DVSURYRÿHQMHPDNDULQDMSURVWLMH'VHL]PLþNH
analize aprilfikacije na konkretnoj lokaciji.
Rešenje za ovaj problem jHXYRÿHQMHSRVHEQLKSUDYLOQLNDRYUVWLXRELPXLVWUDåQLKUDGRYD

NRML SUHGKRGH VHL]LPLüNRMPLNURUHRQL]DFLML X VXSURWQRP üH VH XYHN SUDYLWL NRPSURPLVL L
QHRSKRGQLSDUDPHWULGRELMDWLLVOMXþLYRNUR]NRUHODFLMDDQHNUR]LVWUDåQHUDGRYHWeatherill
(2019) i Pitilakis (2019) imaju najaktuelnije radove na ovu temu gde je Evropski kontinet
definisan kao jedinsven istražni prostor i neophodni je izvršiti harmonizaciju geo podataka i
PHGRWRORJLMD]DRGUHÿLYDQMHORNDOQRJRGJRYRUDWOD
490
IZRADA DINAMIý.2*MODELA TLA
Obzirom da je *HRWHKQLþNR]HPOMRWUHVQRLQåHQMHUVWYRoblast koja se bavi tlom, stenama i

podzemnom vodom, kao i njihovim odnosom prema projektovanju, izgradnji i eksploataciji
JUDÿHYLQVNLKREMHNDWDXVHL]PLþNLDNWLYQLPSRGUXþMLPD L]UDGDPRGHODNRMLüHQDSUDYLQDþLQ
reprezentovati sve fenomene je veoma kompleksna. Ono je u suštini usko povezano sa
geodinamikom, geofizikom i inženjerskom geologijom, kao granom geologije, a njihovo
]DMHGQLþNRXþHãüHXUHãDYDQMXDNWXHOQHSUREOHPDWLNHMHSRåHOMQR
6OLND'LQDPLþNLPRGHO
Figure 1. Dynamic model
,]UDGDQDMRVQRYQLMHJGLQDPLþNRJPRGHODu specijalizovanom softveru za dobre poznavaoce

QXPHULþNRJPRGHOLUDQMD LPDMXüLXYLGXVYHYLãHUD]SRORåLYLKNRPHUFLMDOQLKVRIWYHUDSRVWDMH
sve jednostavnijaDOLLSDNLPDVSHFLILþQRVWL RNRMLPDWUHEDYRGLWLUDþXQD
One se u geotehnici odnose pre VYHJDQDNRQWXUQHXVORYHLGLQDPLþNHSDUDPHWUHWOD.RQWXUQL

XVORYLSULGLQDPLþNRMDQDOL]LRGXGDUDMXRGVWDQGDUQLKQHSRPHUOMLYLKRVORQDFDX[L\SUDYFX
3UL GLQDPLþNRM DQDOL]L VH SULPHQMXMX DEVRUEXMXüL NRQWXUQL XVORYL NDNR QH EL GRãOR GR
refleksije unete GLQDPLþNH SREXGH R QHSRPHUOMLYH RVORQFH. âWR VH WLþH VDPH GLQDPLþNH
pobude, SRVWRMLYLãHQDþLQD]DQMHQRDSOLFLUDQMH-HGDQRGPRJXüLKMHGDVH]HPOMRWWHVDSOLFLUD
kao naponski konturni uslov po dnu modelaVDPRMHSUHWRJDQHRSKRGQRNUR]RGJRYDUDMXüH
jedQDþLQHWUDQVIRUPLVDWLRþHNLYDQDXEU]DQMDQDRVQRYQRMVWHQLXQDSRQHQDNRQWDNWXVWHQD-
tlo.
491
Izbor adekvatnog konstitutivnog modela ponašanja tla je svakako još jedan bitan kriterujum,
ali on je u direktnoj korelaciji sa istražnim radovima koji se vrše.
,]UDGDSUDYLOQRJJHRGLQDPþNRJPRGHODpodrazumeva multidisciplinarnost, tj. pretpostavlja

SRWUHEX SR]QDYDQMD UD]XPHYDQMD L NRULãüHQMD ]QDWQRJ EURMD UD]OLþLWLK SRGDWDND L] UD]QLK
GLVFLSOLQDDSUHVYHJDJHRORãNLKVHL]PRORãNLKJHRWHKQLþNLKNRQVWUXNWLYQLK, arhitektonskih,
XUEDQLVWLþNLKLVRFLR-ekonomskih.
Složeniji modeli koji probaju da simuliraju interakciju tla i konstrukcije -HUHPLüSUH
VYHJD WUHEDMX QD SUDYL QDþLQ GD SUHGVWDYH NRQWDNQX ]RQX L]PHÿX REMHNWD L NRQVWUXNFLMH L
prigušenje do koga zbog interakcije dolazi.
6YH RYH DQDOL]H QLVX QD SUDYL QDþLQ IRUPDOL]RYDQH NUR] RGJRYDUDMXüH SUDYLOQLNH R
projkektovanju i monitoringu konstrukcija. 1RYL WUHQGRYL X JHRWHKQLþNRP ]HPOMRWUHVQRP
inženjerstvu su projektovanje bazirano na ponašanju (performance based design – PBD) kao
L QRYLK WHKQRORJLMD NRMH PRJX ]QDþDMQR SRPRüL X REH]EHÿLYDQMX VHL]PLþNH RWSRUQRVWL
REMHNWDED]QDL]RODFLMDLSULPHQDSULJXãLYDþD
PROBABILISTIý.(0('27( I NJIHOVA PRIMENA U PRAKSI
,PDMXüLXYLGXQHSRX]GDQRVWNDNRVHLPRORãNLKWDNRLJHRWHKQLþNLKSDUDPHWDUDVYDNDDQDOL]D
X ]HPOMRWUHVQRM JHRWHKQLFL QRVL VD VRERP RGUHÿHQX GR]X QHWDþQRVWL 8NUãWDQMH RYD GYD
JODYQDL]YRUDQHWDþQRVWLGLQDPLþNDSREXGDSDUDPHWULWODPXOWLSOLNXMHGLVSHU]LMXGRELMHQLK
UH]XOWDWDLþLQLGDXRGUHÿHQLPVOXþDMHYLPDUH]XOWDWHPRUDPRX]HWLVDYHüRPGR]RPUH]HUYH
8SUDYRQDPXSRWUHEDSUREDELOLVWLþNRJSULVWXSDPRåHSRPRüLGDNYDQWLILNXMHPRRYXGR]X
QHWDþQRVWL
6OLND$QDOL]DVWDEORGRJDÿDMD Slika 3.Uticaj varijacije geotehniþkih parametara

Figure 2. Event tree analysis Figure 3. Influence of variation of soil parameters
492
Na slici 3. tri prikazano je kombinovanje razOLþLWLK VFHQDULMD VHL]PLþNH SRQXGH L VHWRYD

JHRWHKQLþNLKSDUDPHWUDNRMHUH]XOWXMHsa dve UD]OLþLWHkrive performansa koje se odnose na
permanentna deformacija klizne mase (Zugic 2012) koje su prikazane na slici 3.
Rezultati nam govore da za niži nivo defRUPDFLMDXWLFDMWODQDVHL]PLþNLSHIURUPDQVMHYHRPD
veliki, dok je SULOLNRP MDþLK ]HPOMRWUHVD relativni XWLFDM JHRWHKQLþNLK SDUDPHWDUD znatno
manji.
2YLUH]XOWDWLGRELMDMXMRãYLãHQD]QDþDMXNDGD]QDPRGDMH6UELMDSRGUXþMHPDOHGRVUHGQMH
VHL]PLþQRVWLSDVDPLPWLPXWLFDMJHRWHKQLþNLKSDUDPHWDUDQDXNXSQLVHL]PLþNo ponašanje
objekata XSRUHÿHHQMXVDXWLFDMHPVHL]PLþNLKSDUDPHWDUDnije zanemarljiv.
=$./-8ý&,
3UDNWLþQLLWHRULjski principi dinamike tla i zemljotresnoj geotehnici nalaze svoju primenu

NDNRXJUDÿHYLQDUVWYXWDNRLVYLPVURGQLPREODVWLPDJGHLPDPRGLQDPLþNHSREXGH - pre
svega u mašinstvu i rudarstvu.
Benefiti uzimanja u obzir GLQDPLþNLKSDUDPHWDUDWODLGLQDPLþNHDQDOL]HVXYHRPDRJUDQLþHQi
ukoliko se primenjuju na tipske probleme - JHRVWDWLþNHSURUDþXQHXNRMLPDMHFLOMRVWYDULWL
IDNWRUH VLJXUQRVWL ]DKWHYDQH RGUHÿHQLP SUDYLOQLNRP Stoga se u ovoj oblasti sve više
primenjuje projektovanje zasnovano na ponašanju JGH RGUHÿHQL SDUDPHWDU NRML Rdredimo
tokom projektovanja možemo pratiti tokom gradnje i eksploatacije. ,PDMXüLXYLGX
QHWDþQRVWXOD]QLKSDUDPHWDUDGLQDPLþNDSREXGDWORSUREDELOLVWLþNHPHWRGHVYHYLãHQDOD]H
SULPHQX X ]HPOMRWHVQRP JHRWHKQLþNRP LQåHQMHUVWYX, i danas iK MH PRJXüH UHODWLYQR ODNR
SULPHQLWLNRULþüHQMHPUDVSRORåLYLKVRIWYHUVNLKUHãHQMD
LITERATURA
Jeremic B, Dinamika konstrukcija i tla pri zemljotresima, nepouzdanimodeli, nepouzdani parametri

LWHRULMDYHURYDWQRüD. Materijal sa predavanja u Institutu IMS 16. Decembar 2016.
Kramer, S. L. (1996). Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J
Pitilakis K., Riga E., Karatzetzou A., Pitilakis D .Risk model at national and local scale. Validation
studies/site amplification modelling. Approach for Europe SERA European Seismic Risk
Workshop 12th/13th September 2019, Istanbul, Turkey
Srbulov.M, Practical soil dynamics: Case studies in earthquake and geotechnical engineering
January 2011 DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-1312-3
Weatherill G, Kotha S.R., Cotton F., Roulle A., Lemoine A., Crowley H. Site Amplification
Modelling at Regional Scale: Approach for Europe SERA European Seismic
Risk Workshop 12th/13th September 2019, Istanbul, Turkey
Zugic Z. Methodology for probabilistic performance based seismic slope stability for regions with
low to moderate seismicity. (PhD thesis). Skopje: Ss. Cyril and Methodius University; 2012.
Zugic, Z., Sesov, V., (2010) Uncertainties of seismic and geotechnical data for performance based
seismic slope stability analysis. Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on
Earthquake Engineering. Ohrid, Macedonia. August 30- September 3, Paper No.1864
493
Pregledni rad
UDK 624.158:614.84
PROMJENA TEMPERATURE U TUNELSKOJ

OBLOZI U TOKU TRAJANJA POŽARA
Miodrag %XMLãLü Slobodan äLYDOMHYLü, Borko 0LODGLQRYLü,
=YRQNR7RPDQRYLü
Univerzitet Crne Gore, *UDÿHYLQVNL fakultet u Podgorici,
bul. Džordža Vašingtona, Podgorica, Crna Gora
miodragb@ucg.ac.me, slobodanz@ucg.ac.me, borkom@ucg.ac.me,
zvonko@ucg.ac.me
REZIME
U þODQNXse analizira uticaj požara na tunelsku oblogu u zavisnosti od vremena. Uticaj požara
na tunelsku oblogu je VLPXOLUDQSRPRüXWULWLSLþQHNULYHSRåDUD. Maksimalna temperatura na
unutrašnjoj konturi tunela iznosi 1300 °& =D ]DGDWR RSWHUHüHQMH NDR L]OD]QL SDUDPHWDU L]
programa, razmatrana je raspodjela temperature po dubini obloge, SULþHPXMHXVWDQRYOMHQR
da se nakon 3h cca 50 % debljine presjeka nalazi pod temepraturom višom od 100 °C.
Modeliranje tunelske konstrukcije i parametarska anlaiza je provedena primjenom
VRIWYHUVNRJSURJUDPD$QV\V95D]PDWUDQMHWLSLþDQSRSUHþQLSUHVMHNWXQHODSURMHNWRYDQ
na auto-putu Bar-Boljare, dionica Smokovac-Mateševo.
./-8ý1(5(ý,tunel, požar, ansys, 2D model, temperatura – vrijeme kriva
CHANGE OF TEMPERATURE IN TUNNEL LINING

DURING THE DURATION OF FIRE
ABSTRACT
This paper analysis the impact of fire on the tunnel lining during the time. Impact of the fire
on the tunnel lining is entered with three typical fire curve. The maximum temperature inside
of the tunnel is 1300 ° C. For a given load as output parameter from the program were
assessed the distribution of temperature in the depth of lining, wherein it was found that after
approximately 3 hours 50% of the thickness cross section is below a fever higher than 100 °
C. Modeling of tunnel structure has been done in the software Ansys V16. The cross section
of the tunnel has the shape of structure designed on the highway Bar-Boljare, section
Smokovac-Matesevo.
KEY WORDS: tunnel, fire, ansys, 2D model, temperature – time curve
UVOD
Kolaps tunelske konstrukcije se osim QHRþHNLYDQLKJHRORãNLKXVORYDGHãDYDL]ERJgrešaka

SULOLNRP SURMHNWRYDQMD L]YRÿHQMD LOL QHNLK GUXJLK LQåHQMHUVNLK IDNWRUD kao što su
494
VDREUDüDMQe nezgode, požari XWXQHOLPDLVOLþQR8RYRPUDGXREUDÿen je uticaj maksimalne

temperature požara na tunelsku konstrukciju u toku vremena. Dejstvo požara na tunelsku
konstrukciju može se UD]PDWUDWLVDYLãHDVSHNDWDLX]DYLVQRVWLRGJHRPHWULMVNLKLPHKDQLþNLK
karakteristika elemenata konstrukcije, ali i karakteristika požara. U ovom þODQNX je
analizirana promjena temperature u tunelskoj konstrukciji u vremenskom trajanju od 3 h.
MODELIRANJE DEJSTVA POŽARA
Modeliranje dejstva požara WMSURFHVDSURYRÿHQMDWRSORWHNUR] sekundarnu tunelsku oblogu

izvršeno je u softverskom programu Ansys V16, Transient Thermal modul. Radi se o
programu opšte namjene zasnovanom na PHWRGL NRQDþQLK HOHPenata. Geometrija modela
IRUPLUDQDMHNDR'SULþHPXMHSRSUHþQLSUHVMHNWXQHOVNHNRQVWUXNFLMHPRGHOLUDQ]DMHGQR
sa okolnom stijenskom masom (slika 1). Konstrukcija tunela definisana je na osnovu realne
tunelske konstrukcije projektovane na autoputu Bar – Boljare, dionica Smokovac -Mateševo.
U programu su definisane karakteristike pojedinih materijala (stijenske mase i armiranog
betona), kao i konstantna temperatura spoljašnje sredine od 22 °C. Debljina sekundarne
obloge je SURPMHQOMLYDLNUHüHVHRG cm u kaloti do 80 cm u dnu oporaca.
Slika 1. Geometrijske karakteristike modela i ulazni podaci(tunel i stijenska masa)

Figure 1. Geometric characteristic of model and input data (tunnel and rock mass)
Stijenska masa je mRGHOLUDQD PUHåRP NRQDþQLK HOHPHQWD SULPMHQRP þHWYRURXJDRQLK

kRQDþQLKHOHPHQWDGLPH]LMD m. Za tunelsku oblogu mUHåDNRQDþQLKHOHPHQDWDIRUPLUDQD
je NDRþHWYRURXJDRQDL to tako da je spoljašnja linijDREORJHGHILQLVDQDNRQDþQLPHOHPHQWLPD
maksimalne dužine 0.5 m. ,PDMXüLXYLGX da je temperaturna kriva zadata po unutrašnjoj
konturi REORJHWXQHODX]RQLQDMYHüeg gradijenta temperaturePUHåDNRQDþQLKHOHPHQDWD
MHIRUPLUDQDNRULVWHüLVHRSFLMRP³LQIlation”. Definisana je debljina prvog sloja po dubini,
495
gledano od unutrašnje konture REORJHVDYULMHGQRãüXRG cm, a uz aplikacioni faktor od

1.2, definisana je PUHåHNRQDþQLKHOHPHQDWDWXQHOVNHREORJH NRMDMHQDWDMQDþLQ SURJXãüHQa
u zoni najYHüHJXWicaja od požara.
-HGQDþLQDSURYRÿHQMDWRSORWH]DUDYDQVNL'SUREOHPJODVL
эdͬэƚ = a ;э2dͬэǆ2 нэ2dͬэǇ2),

SULþHPXMH
a = ȜĳF
8 JRUQMRM MHGQDþLQL ³a” predstavlja odnos toplotne provodljivosti i proizvoda toplotne

GLIX]LYQRVWLĳLVSHFLILþQHWRSORWHF
Termalne karakteristike materijala definisane su preko programskog modula “Thermal

Transiet” u kome je zadata toplotna SURYRGOMLYRVWLȜSULþHPXMHQMHQDYULMHGQRVWX]HWDNDR
konstanta od 0.72 W/m°C. Vrijednost Ȝ opada sa porastom temperature tako da je jedan
PRGHOREXYDWLRSURUDþXQ]DȜ= 1.20. Vrijednost VSHFLILþQe WRSORWHNRULãüHQHXSURUDþXQX
iznosi 780 J/kg°C.
DEFINISANJE KRIVIH POŽARA
Dejstvo požara je predstavljeno preko tri krive požara, ito: “HydroCarbon” kriva (HC),
“Modified HydroCarbon” kriva (HCM) i ISO 834 kriva požara. Krive požara su razvijene
kao rezultat dugogodišnjih terenskih i laboratorijskih istraživanja kako bi se ustanovili
YMHURGRVWRMQLPRGHOLNRMLELVHNRULVWLOL]DVLPXODFLMXRSWHUHüHQMDRGWHPperature izazvane
požarom (Breunese i dr., 2008.). Krive požara koje su usvojene u ovom radu predstavljaju
iskustveno dobijenu realnu raspodjelu temperature usled dejstva požara. Iskustveno je
pokazano da maksimalne vrijednosti koje se razvijaju u tunelima tokom požara dostižu
maksimalne vrijednosti dobijene ovim krivim. Osim pomenutih krivih, za potrebe definisanja
dejstva požara u toku vremena u tunelima, ustanovljene su i krive: “Cellulosic” kriva, “RABT
ZTV” kriva i “RWS (Rijkswaterstaat)” kriva.
Krive požara koje se koriste u ovom radu, definisane su grafiþNL LMHGQDþLQDPDSULND]DQLP

na Slici 28SURJUDPX$QV\VPRJXüHMHXQLMHWLNULYHSRåDUDXRULJLQDOQRPREOLNXSULþHPX
program kao izlazni podatak unešene IXQNFLMH GDMH JUDILþNL SULND] ]DGDWRJ RSWHUHüHQMD u
zavisnosti od zadatog vremenskog intervala. Funkcija porasta temperature je aplicirana po
unutrašnjoj konturi tunelske obloge. 1DSULND]DQLPNULYLPSRåDUDXRþDYDVHGDVH]D “HC”
i “MHC” krivu maksimalna temperatura dostiže nakon 30 minuta, dok za “ISO 834” krivu
maksimalna temperatura se javlja tek nakon 3 h i približna je vrijednosti maksimuma od
1100 °C koja važi i za “HC” krivu. Makismalna temperatura požara koja se javlja kod
“MHC” krive iznosi 1300 °C.
496
1400
1200
1000
Temperatura (°C)
800
600
<ƌŝǀĂƉŽǎĂƌĂ,ͲdсϮϬнϭϬϴϬΎ;ϭͲϬ͘ϯϮϱĞͲϬ͘ϭϲϳΎƚͲϬ͘ϲϳϱĞͲϮ͘ϱΎƚͿ
400
<ƌŝǀĂƉŽǎĂƌĂD,ͲdсϮϬнϭϮϴϬΎ;ϭͲϬ͘ϯϮϱĞͲϬ͘ϭϲϳΎƚͲϬ͘ϲϳϱĞͲϮ͘ϱΎƚͿ
200
<ƌŝǀĂƉŽǎĂƌĂ/^Kϴϯϰ͕dсϮϬнϯϰϱΎůŽŐ;ϴΎƚŝŵĞнϭͿ
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Vrijeme (min)
Slika 2. 3URUDþXQVNHkrive požara

Figure 2. Fire curves used in calculations
ANALIZA DOBIJENIH REZULTATA
Za analizu rezultata dobijenih usled dejstva SRåDUDSRPRüX]DGDWLKNULYLL]DEUDQMHSUHVMHN

XNDORWLWXQHOVNHNRQVWUXNFLMH8NDUDNWHULVWLþQRPSUHVMHNX L]DEUDQHVXWDþNH koje odgovaraju
JUDQLFDPD VORMHYD GRELMHQLP IRUPLUDQMH PUHåH NRQDþQLK HOHPHQDWD (Slika 3). Debljine
VORMHYDVXUD]OLþLWHLposmatrano od dna ka vrhu presjeka, slojevi VXRJUDQLþHQLWDþNDPDod
A1 do A9 i B.
8 ]RQL NRMD MH GHILQLVDQD L]PHÿX WDþDND $ L $ GHMVWYR SRåDUD MH QDML]UDåHQLMH GRN
YULMHGQRVWLUH]XOWDWDGRELMHQHX]RQLL]PHÿXWDþDND$L%QHSUHOD]H °. Tunelska obloga
MHL]GLMHOMHQDQDVORMHYHUD]OLþLWLKGHEOMLQDSULþHPXje ovakvo modeliranje izabrano kako bi
se dobili pouzdani rezultati s obzirom da je dejstvo požara dominanto u toj zoni. Za definisane
WDþNHSULND]DQHVXYULMHGQRVWLWHPSHUDWXUHGDWHQD6OLNDPa 4, 5 i 6. Vrijednosti temperature
usled dejstva požara prikazane su za vremenske WUHQXWNH QDNRQ RWSRþLQMDQMD SRåDUD L WR
nakon: 18 sekundi (0.005 h), 90 sekundi (0.025 h), 1800 sekundi (0.5 h), 3600 sekundi (1 h),
5400 sekundi (1.5 h), 7200 sekundi (2 h), 9000 sekundi (2.5 h) i 10800 sekundi (3 h).
497
Slika 3. Raspodjela temperature nakon 3h za presjek u kaloti (“HC”)

Figure 3. Distribution of temperature in the cross section after 3 h (“HC”)
Debljina obloge / lining depth [cm]

0.00 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 17.50 20.00 22.50 25.00 27.50 30.00
1200
1100 ϭϴ ϵϬ ϭϴϬϬ ϯϲϬϬ ϱϰϬϬ ϳϮϬϬ ϵϬϬϬ ϭϬϴϬϬ
1000
900
Temperatura / Temperature (°C)
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Slika 4. Zavisnost temperatura – YULMHPHXSRVPDWUDQLPWDþNDPD- kriva požara ISO 834/

Figure 4. Dependance temperature – time in obtained points – fire curve ISO 834
Dobijeni rezultati pokazuju da za dejstvo požara u vremenu od 18 sekundi i 90 sekundi,

temperatura raste u WDþNL$1 XRGQRVXQDWDþNX$2 i do 20 puta za 18 sekundi, odnosno i do
5 puta za 90 sekundi, dok je ta razlika za interval od 1800 sekundi do 10800 sekundi od 8.5 %
498
do 20.0 7DNRÿHu vremenu od 18 sekundi i 90 VHNXQGLRGSRþHWNDSRåDUDXWDþNama A1

i A2 temperatura dostiže maksimalne vrijednosti, dok vrijednost temperature okruženja od
22 °C ostaje nepromijenjena YHüXWDþNDPD$RGQRVQR$L to za sve tri krive požara.

0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 22.5 25.0 27.5 30.0
1200
1100
1000
ϭϴ
900
ϵϬ
800
ϭϴϬϬ
700
ϯϲϬϬ
600
ϱϰϬϬ
500
ϳϮϬϬ
400
ϵϬϬϬ
300
ϭϬϴϬϬ
200
100
Slika 5. Zavisnost temperatura – YULMHPHXSRVPDWUDQLPWDþNDPD- kriva požara HC/

Diagram 5. Dependance temperature – time in obtained points – fire curve HC
0.00 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 17.50 20.00 22.50 25.00 27.50 30.00
1400
1300 ϭϴ
1200 ϵϬ
ϭϴϬϬ
1100
ϯϲϬϬ
1000
ϱϰϬϬ
900 ϳϮϬϬ
ϵϬϬϬ
800
ϭϬϴϬϬ
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Slika 6. Zavisnost temperatura – YULMHPHXSRVPDWUDQLPWDþNDPD- kriva požara MHC /

Diagram 6. Dependance temperature – time in obtained points – fire curve MHC
499
Za vremenski interval od 1800 sekundi do 10800 VHNXQGLXWLFDMGHMVWYDSRåDUD]QDþDMQRUDVWH

po dubini presjeka. Za vremenski trenutak od 3 þDVD WXQHOVND REORJD X SRORYLQL GHEOMLQH
(15 cm) ima vrijednost temperature višu od 100 °C. Za “ISO 834” krivu nakoh 3 h vrijednost
temperature na polovini presjeka (d=15 cm) iznosi nekoliko stepeni više od 100 °C, dok za
kriYX ³+&´ RGJRYDUDMXüD YULMHGQRVW iznosi cca 125 °C. Za krivu “MHC” vrijednost
temperature nakon 3 h u polovini presjeka iznosi cca 160 °C.
Na Slici 7. prikazan je profil temperature kroz presjek obloge u kaloti za t=30min i t=3h za
sve tri krive. Primjetno je da je uticaj dejstva požara za krive XJOMRYRGRQLþQRJ SRåDUD
(“HC”,“MHC”) YHüLRG³,62 834” krive gledano po dubini presjeka, odnosno da temperature
YHüLK YULMHGQRVWL SURGLUX GXEOMH X SUHVMHN 2YR SURL]LOD]L L] SUHWKRGQR UHþHQRJ GD VH
ekstremne vrijednosti temperature kod ovih NULYLKMDYOMDMXYHüQDSRþHWNXSRåDUDGRNVHNRG
“ISO 834” krive ekstremna vrijednost dostiže na kraju trajanja požara.
0.00 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 17.50 20.00 22.50 25.00 27.50 30.00
1400
1300
1200
1100
MHC t=3h
1000
HC t=3h
900
800 ISO t=3h
700
MHC t=30min
600
ISO t=30min
500
400 HC t=30min
300
200
100
Slika 7. Profil temperature kroz presjek obloge za t=30min i t=3h /

Slika 7. Temperature profile through lining cross section for t=30min and t=3h
Vrijednost koeficijenta toplotne provodljivosti Ȝ opada sa porastom temperature za

vrijednosti Ȝ = 0.72 i Ȝ =1.2. Na Slici 8 su prikazane uporedne vrijednosti za sve tri krive u
WDþNL$=DYLVQRVWSRND]XMH proporcionalnost SRYHüDQMDYULMHGQRVWLWHPSHUDWXUHSULOLNRP
NRULãüHQMD YHüH YULMHGQRVWL NRHILFLMHQWD Ȝ u svim vremenskim intervalima. Najizraženija
UD]OLND X XSRUHÿLYDQMX YULMHGQRVWL RGJRYDUDMXüLK NULYLK MH NRG +& FFD %), dok je
QDMPDQMDNRGXSRUHÿLYDQMD³,62ŃULYLKFFD 3 %).
500
1200
1100 dĂĐŬĂϯͬ
WŽŝŶƚϯ
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
dĂēŬĂϯʄсϭ͘ϮϬ͗HC dĂēŬĂϯʄсϭ͘ϮϬ͗MHC
300 dĂēŬĂϯʄсϭ͘ϮϬ͗ISO 834 dĂēŬĂϯʄсϬ͘ϳϮ͗HC
200 dĂēŬĂϯʄсϬ͘ϳϮ͗MHC dĂēŬĂϯʄсϬ͘ϳϮ͗ISO 834
100
0
0 1800 3600 5400 7200 9000 10800
Vrijeme (sekunde)/ Time (seconds)
Slika 8. Promjena temperature u taþNLA3 u toku vremena za O=0.72 i O=1.20
Slika 8. Temperature change in point A3 during time for O=0.72 and O=1.20
=$./-8ý&,
U þODQNXje analiziran uticaj dejstva požara na tunelsku sekundarnu oblogu u toku trajanja
od 3h. 8WLFDM SRåDUD VLPXOLUDQ MH SRPRüX WUL NULYH WLSLþQH ]D RYDM WLS NRQVWUXNFLMH LWR
“ISO 834” kriva, “HydroCarbon” kriva i “Modified HydroCarbon” kriva. Dobijeni su
rezultati koji prikazuju vrijednost temperature po dubini presjeka u kaloti (d=30.0cm).
Dobijeni rezultati za sve krive, ukazuju na to GDWUDMDQMHSRåDUD]QDþDMQRXWLþHQDSRYHüDQMH
vrijednosti temperature u presjeku betona. Nakon 3 h djelovanja požara, oko 50 % debljine
presjeka nalazi se pod temperaturom višom od 100 °C (za Ȝ = 0.72). Dubina SRYHüDQMD
temperature GRELMHQD X RYRP UDGX SRND]XMH YHüL UDþXQVNL stepen prodiranja temperature
unutar presjeka za krive XJOMRYRGRQLþQRJ SRåDUD (“HC”,“MHC”) u odnosu na “ISO 834”
krivu. %XGXüD LVWUDåLYDQMD PRJOD bi LüL u pravcu YDULUDQMD YULMHGQRVWL PRGXOD HODVWLþQRVWL
betona, toplotne provodljivosti, ili drugih svojstava, koja se mijenjaju pri dejstvu požara uz
XSRUHÿHQMHVDYULMHGQRVWLPDGRELMHQLPXRYRPUDGX
LITERATURA:
F. Borgheti, M. Derudi, P. Gandini, A. Frassoldati, S. Tavelli – Tunnel fire testing and modeling
–The Morgex North Tunnel Experiment,Springer International Publishing (2017)
H. Ingason, Y. Zhen Li, A. Lönnermark (auth.) - Tunnel Fire Dynamics-Springer-Verlag NY (2015)
Patrick Cunningham - Advanced Loads Webinar (2013).
Ir. A.J. Breunese, Dr. Ir. C. Both, Ir. G.M. Wolsink (Rijkswaterstaat) - Fire testing procedure for
concrete tunnel linings (2008).
Ansys Workbench Tutorials.
Tunnel fire protection – www.promat-tunnel.com
D O N ATO R I
Pod pokroviteljstvom
Република Србија
Министарство просвете,
науке и технолошког развоја
MEGRA doo je trgovačko preduzece osnovano 1992. godine kao privatno
preduzece sa osnovnom delatnošcu zastupanja stranih kompanija i
distribucije opreme i potrošnog materijala za laboratorije. Prateci potrebe
tržišta i potrebe naših klijenata, fokusirali smo se na opremu za uzorkovanje i
praćenje životne sredine, geotehnička ispitivanja i hidrologiju, ispitivanja u
poljoprivredi i ekologiji. Zahvaljujuci upornom radu i specijalizaciji postali
smo lider na tržištu u ovim specifičnim segmentima.
U građevinarstvu i putogradnji smo fokusirani na opremu za

ispitivanje sabijenosti/nosivosti podloga, penetrometre I dinamičke ploče.
Dugi niz godina smo ovlašćeni zastupnik najpoznatijeg proizvođača CPT
mašina, holandske firme GEOMIL kao i nemačkog proizvođača dinamičke
ploče sa padajućim tegom ZORN. Svojim kupcima obezbeđujemo usluge
servisa i kalibracije i pouzdane postprodajne podrške.
INSTITUT ZA ISPITIVANJE MATERIJALA IMS
Bulevar vojvode Mišića 43, Beograd
CENTAR ZA PUTEVE I GEOTEHNIKU
ODELENJE ZA GEOTEHNIKU I NADZOR
ISBN 978-86-88897-13-6

Geotehnika 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Geotehnika 2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geotehnika 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats



 ȀȋEditor in ChiefȌǣǤ   *

CIP- Каталогизација у публикацији

,ǣæ    *ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡ- 

~   

  ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ

ʹͳǤ Ǥ ǡǤ  ȋȌ

ʹͶǤ Ǥ e©©ǡǤ «ǡ~Ǥ ©ȋȌ

ʹ͸Ǥ ǤǡǤ ȋȌ

͵ͲǤ Ǥ*©ǡǤ ©ǡǤ © ȋȌ

͵͸Ǥ Ǥ ©ǡǤ ©ǡǤǡǤ*© ȋǡ

ͶͷǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ ā©-©ǡ

Ͷ͹Ǥ Ǥ ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ0©ǡ Ǥ© ©ǡǤ,ȋȌ

ͳǤ   –   ,   

 ǣǤ  ©ǡ

PRESENT AND FUTURE OF TESTING, ROCK

KEYWORDS: Rock mechanics, ISRM, testing, rock charaacterization, monitoring

POSTOJEĆE STANJE I BUDUûNOST ISPITIVANJA,

Surface effects (i.e. subsidence) due to underground Bench design

Drilling, blasting, fracturing, cutting, digging, ripping, etc.

Design and support of tunnels for

Conveyance (water, drainage, sewer) Stability of rock

Design and support of caverns for highways or

TEST METHOD, STANDARD AND ISRM SUGGESTED METHODS

Test Method and Standards

ISRM Suggested Methods

Test/Monitoring/Characterization methods ISRM ASTM

Quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses a,b 3

Test/Monitoring/Characterization methods ISRM ASTM

Test/Monitoring/Characterization methods ISRM ASTM

The SM development is undertaken by Working Groups (WGs), where experts appointed by

6. A proposal should be prepared by a WG, which is established by a Chairman or Co-

FUTURE TRENDS IN ROCK CHARACTERIZATION, TESTING AND

VBP: Low Medium High VBP: Low Medium High

VBP: Low Medium High VBP: Low Medium High

Rock spalling is also an important aspect in rock engineering, particularly in underground

Fig. 7. Examples of spalling in underground openings (Kaiser, 2010).

GEOTECHNICS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING IN

KEYWORDS: Geotecnics in Civil Engineering, Eurocodes, Regulatory

i sa iskustvima iz proteklih 10 godina, ali bez ambicija da se pruži više od OLþQRJVD]QDQMDR

Od interesa je , naravno , rasmatrati barem okvirno i nepotpuno šta se dešava sa

U proteklom periodu od 2009 godine odvijale su se brojne aktivnosti u gradjevinarstvu Srbije,

PRIMENA ISPITIVANJA I DEFINISANJA SVOJSTAVA TERENA

1DRYRPSRGUXþMX*UDGMHYLQVNH*HRWHKQLNHVHVXVWLþXDNWLYQRVWLviše geo- struka, i rezultati

Ipak se uvidja GD¶¶PHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYD¶¶NRMDVHXQRVH NDR ‚‚ulazni podaci‚‚ - inputi) u više

Poslednjih godina i u širem okruženju i kod nas GRãORMHGRXþHVWDQHSULPHQHQDPHQVNLK

3RãWRPHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYDWODLVWHQDi kad se usvoje kao NRQVWDQWQHYHOLþLQH ustvari zavise

kompleksnim uslovima QHSULGDMHRGJRYDUDMXüL ]QDþDMSDQHWDNRUHWNHKDYDULMVNHVLWXDFLMH

Može se postaviti i pitanje da li se nastavnim programima na Gradjevinskim fakultetima u

U situaciji kakva je danas treba prihvatiti da EH]GRSXQVNRJ¶¶XþHQMD¶¶L nakon dobijanja

Rana identifikacija kompleksnosti interakcije objekta i terena i nepovoljnih terenskih uslova

S tim u vezi je korisno ]D*HRWHKQLþNXSUREOHPDWLNXQDYHVWL Evrokod EC 7 koji se sukcesivno

U oNYLUX ¶¶XRELþDMHQLK¶¶ SRVWXSDND LVWUDåLYDQMD WHUHQD ]DVQRYDQLK QD SRVWXSFLPD

PRAKSA I OKO PRAKSE

Nije nepoznato, barem ‚‚u principu‚‚ da QDþLQRPL]YRGMHQMDJUDGMHYLQVNLKNRQVWUXNFLMDNDG

Zato bi mogli da kažemo : dok je prikazivanje u saopštenjima ‚‚uspešnih‚‚ realizacija

3RVWRMHüL YDåHüL WHKQLþNLQRUPDWLYL koji su publikovani kao propisi, i kao standardi za

služe kao jedina GRPDüDWHKQLþND regulativa iz oblasti Gradjevinske Geotehnike. Novina je

U pripremi je ‚‚sveobuhvatni‚‚ Pravilnik za gradjevinske konstrukcije, kojim bi bilo

ȀȋEditor in ChiefȌǣǤ *

,ǣæ *ǡǤāǤ¯Ǥǡ-

~

ǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤǤ ͳ

ʹͳǤ ǤǡǤ ȋȌ

ʹͶǤ Ǥ e©©ǡǤ «ǡ~Ǥ ©ȋȌ

ʹ͸Ǥ ǤǡǤ ȋȌ

͵ͲǤ Ǥ*©ǡǤ ©ǡǤ © ȋȌ

͵͸Ǥ Ǥ ©ǡǤ ©ǡǤǡǤ*© ȋǡ

ͶͷǤ Ǥ©ǡǤ ā©-©ǡ

Ͷ͹Ǥ Ǥ ©ǡǤ©ǡǤ0©ǡǤ©©ǡǤ,ȋȌ

ͳǤ – ,

ǣǤ ©ǡ

1DRYRPSRGUXþMXUDGMHYLQVNHHRWHKQLNHVHVXVWLþXDNWLYQRVWLviše geo- struka, i rezultati

Ipak se uvidja GD¶¶PHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYD¶¶NRMDVHXQRVHNDR ‚‚ulazni podaci‚‚ - inputi) u više

3RãWRPHKDQLþNDVYRMVWYDWODLVWHQDi kad se usvoje kao NRQVWDQWQHYHOLþLQH ustvari zavise

kompleksnim uslovima QHSULGDMHRGJRYDUDMXüL ]QDþDMSDQHWDNRUHWNHKDYDULMVNHVLWXDFLMH

3RVWRMHüLYDåHüLWHKQLþNLQRUPDWLYL koji su publikovani kao propisi, i kao standardi za

8SRGUXþMXUDGMHYLQVNHHRWHKQLNHGDNOHQHL]DREODVW*HRWHKQLNHX5XGDUVWYXOLFHQFH

3RVWRMHXWHKQLþNRMGRNXPHQWDFLMLþDN i ’’izjave’’ projektanata – ¶¶VWDWLþDUD¶¶GDVHSURUDþXQ

Vojkan -RYLþLü, Jože Ratej, Joerg Prestor**

./-8ý1(5(ý,karst, geologija, hidrogeologija, gradnja tunela, projektovanje, TBM,

6OLND7UDVDGUXJRJWLUD'LYDþD-.RSHUVDSULSDGDMXüLPREMHNWLPD (tuneli T1 –T8 isprekidana plava

QDMYHüLL]D]RYJUDGQMHåHOH]QLþNHSUXJHVXGYDWXQHOD7(dug 6,7 km) i T2 (dug 6,0 km)

8WLSLþQRj geološkoj sekvenci, zbog svoje niske propustljivosti vodeIOLã]DGUåDYD]QDþDMQH

RULHQWDFLMDMDPHQLMHSUHGVWDYOMDOD]QDþDMDQSUREOHP]DJUDGQMXWXQHOD-RYLþLü, 2006). U toku

Pojave NDUVWLILNDFLMHNDUVWQLIHQRPHQLVXXþODQNXXSRWUHEOMHQLNDRSRMPRYLNRMLRSLVXMX

]RQHQHSUHNLQMHQHGRVWDYHHOHNWULþQHHQHUJLMHPRJXüQRVti jednostavnog održavanja mašine,

je RGUHÿHQLK UD]OLþLWLKWLSRYD]DXSRWUHEX PDWULþQHPRWRGHkoje su vodile do definisanja 29

Slika 6.DUDNWHULVWLþQLpoSUHþQLSUHsek u dreniranom delu tunela

Slika 7.DUDNWHULVWLþQLSRSUHþQLSUHVHNXnedreniranom delu tunela

./-8ý1(5(ý,Terzaghi, inženjerska geologija, geomorfologija, mehanika stijena,

VYHXþLOLãWLPD%LRMHWHRUHWLþDULGDRMHEURMQDteorijska rješenja. Bio je i praNWLþDU, QDMþHãüH

*RYRUHüL R RGQRVX JUDÿHYLQVNRJ LQåHQMHUD L JHRORJD 7HU]DJKL (1946) kaže: “Kako bi

primiMHQMHQHPHKDQLNHWODQDVOMHGHüLQDþLQ"Mnogi se problemi konstrukcijskog inženjerstva

Slika 3. 3RSUHþQLSUHVMHFLNUR]3HUXVNDPHQRORPDEOL]X6DR3DXODNRMHMHQDSUDYLR7HU]DJKLL]

RYX SURFMHQX NDVQLMH SRYHüDva na 0,5 mm godišnje, odnosno na 50 cm za 1000